This writ petition challenged a Sub-Collector's order rejecting a stay application against a Tahasildar's eviction order. The court dismissed the petition but ordered parties to maintain status quo over the land until the appeal's disposal.
Petition disposed; parties directed to maintain status quo over the land till disposal of the appeal.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P.(C)NO. 6098 of 2016
08.04.2016
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Addl. Government Advocate
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order date
d 2.3.2016 passed by opposite party No.1-Sub-Collector, Kendrapara in Encroachment Appeal No.
4 of 2016 rejecting the application of the petitioner for stay of order passed by opposite par
ty No.2-Tahasildar, Pattamundai in Encroachment Case No. 72 of 2014-15.
It is contended that opposite party No.2-Tahasildar, Pattamundai initiated Enc
roachment Case No. 72 of 2014-15 against the petitioner for unauthorised occupation of Governm
ent land over Plot Nos. 607 & 607 under Khata No. 456 measuring an area Ac.0.00500 kadess of l
and of mouza-Pattamundai in the district of Kendrapara by issuing show cause notice under Form
-Ka. Thereafter issued the final order of eviction on 25.3.2015 under Form-Kha. Challenging th
e said final order petitioner preferred Encroachment Appeal No. 4 of 2016 before opposite part
y No.1-Sub-Collector, Kendrapara along with an application for interim stay. The appellate aut
hority by impugned order dated 2.3.2016 rejected the interim application filed by the petition
er and posted the appeal to 21.5.2016 for hearing.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the appellate authority posted
the appeal for hearing by rejecting the interim application. In the meantime the opposite par
ty No.2 tried to evict the petitioner in such event the appeal will be infructuous.
Considering the above this Court disposes of the writ petition with an observa
tion that the parties shall maintain status quo over the aforesaid land till disposal of the a
ppeal.
S. Panda, J
2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be granted stay of eviction pending appeal against the Tahasildar's order.
Petitioner
Sub-Collector, Kendrapara
Tahasildar, Pattamundai
S. Panda
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court