Allowed

Jayanta Ku. Mohanty v. State of Odisha and Ors.

Orissa HC13 Apr 2018WP(C)/18097/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the Sub-Collector to accept a Form No.2 return filed with a limitation application and condone the delay. The Court also ordered maintenance of status quo on the disputed land pending consideration of the return under the relevant Regulation.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Sub-Collector to accept Form No.2 return with condonation of delay and maintenance of status quo on land.

Jayanta Ku. Mohanty Vs State of Odisha… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Orissa HC (2018)

¶1

W.P.(C) No.18097 of 2017

¶2

13.04.2018

¶3

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State.

¶4

In this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the Sub-Collector, Koraput, District–Koraput - Opposite Party No.3 to accept Form No.2 (Declaration) as per Section- 3 (B) of the Regulation-II of 1956.

¶5

Petitioner alleged that non-acceptance of return U/S. 3 (B) of Regulation- II of 1956 runs contrary to the direction of this Court in a batch of writ petitions. On perusal of one such order, this Court finds that identical matters came up for consideration before this Court in W.P.(C) No.10142 of 2015. A Single Bench of this Court relying on the Order dated 09.05.2011 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No.11562 of 2009 directed the authorities to accept the return of the petitioner.

¶6

In view of the above, this Court directs that in the event, the petitioner files Form No.2 return along with a limitation application within a period of four weeks from today before the Sub-Collector, Koraput, District–Koraput - Opposite Party No.3, the same shall be accepted and the delay be condoned provided the land, for which permission was given, covers the land indicated in the sale

¶7

deed executed in favour of the petitioner. In the event, the Sub-Collector, Koraput, District–Koraput - Opposite Party No.3 accepts Form No.2 (Declaration) and proposes to initiate any proceeding against the petitioner U/S. 3 (B) of the Orissa Regulation- II of 1956, the return filed by the petitioner shall be taken into consideration. Till consideration of the return filed by the petitioner under Section-3-B of Regulation 2 of 1956, status quo as on date in respect of the land in question shall be maintained by the parties.

¶8

The writ application is accordingly disposed of. Urgent certified copy of this Order be granted as per rules.

¶9

………………………….

¶10

Balaram

Jayanta Ku. Mohanty v. State of Odisha and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayanta Ku. Mohanty v. State of Odisha and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tutu Das Vs State of Orissa

Basanti Bhoi Vs State of Orissa

Dangu Bhoi@Kumar Rout Vs State of Orissa

Anil Das@Lipan Das Vs State of Orissa

Chita Ranjan Sahoo Vs State of Orissa

Antaryami Pradhan Vs the Inspector General of Registrationigr