Counsel sought withdrawal of writ with liberty to appeal. The court noted the impugned order lacked a date, granted two weeks to file an appeal under the O.P.L.E. Act, and maintained status quo on disputed property pending appeal.
Time of two weeks granted to file appeal under O.P.L.E. Act; status quo maintained on disputed property pending 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.6844 of 2017
2 05.05.2017 Heard.
It appears, the petitioners have statutory remedy of appeal as against the ord
er under Annexure-1.
Sri Mohanty, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
s seeks permission for withdrawal of the writ petition with liberty to the petitioners to avai
l remedy of statutory appeal. This Court finds surprise in the impugned order at Annexure-1 w
hich does not bear any date.
Under the circumstance, this Court grants two weeks time to the petitioners t
o file appeal under the provision of O.P.L.E. Act and in such event the appeal shall be heard
and concluded on its own merit.
In the event the petitioners are possessing the property as on date, status q
uo as on date in respect of the disputed property shall be maintained till disposal of the app
eal.
Biswanath Rath,J.
sks
2
1 issue framed by the court
What is the procedure for withdrawal of writ petition when the impugned order lacks a date and statutory appeal is available?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Biswanath Rath
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court