Allowed

Mahavir Prasad Ram v. Commissioner of Consolidaton

Orissa HC1 Oct 2020WP(C)/4727/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the Tahasildar, Khurda to implement a revived consolidation order upon a petitioner filing an application, pending the hearing of a review petition earlier stayed. The Court set a four-month timeframe for implementation.

What did the court decide?

Directed Tahasildar to examine application for implementation within four months of filing, providing opportunity of hearing.

Mahavir Prasad Ram Vs Commissioner of Consolidaton — Land Acquisition | Orissa HC (2020)

¶1

W.P.(C) No. 4727 OF 2017

¶2

01.10.2020 Due to outbreak of COVID-19, this matter is taken up through Video Conferencing.

¶3

Heard Mr. Maheswar Mohanty, learned counsel, who has entered appearance on behalf of the petitioner taking consent from the previous counsel appearing for the petitioner.

¶4

The petitioner in this writ petition prays for a direction to the Tahasildar, Khurda to pass necessary orders pursuant to the direction made by the revisional authority vide order dated 06.08.2016 (Annexure-6) in R.P. No. 2138 of 2015.

¶5

This Court vide order dated 07.07.2017 passed the following order:

¶6

“Heard.

¶7

In the counter affidavit, the learned Addl. Government Advocate has taken a stand that against the order, which is sought to be implemented in the writ application, passed by the Commissioner, Consolidation and Settlement, Odisha, Bhubaneswar in the revision petition, the opposite party no.3 has filed an application for review on the ground that land in question has been recorded Chota Jungle and in view of the Section 2 of the Orissa Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, it cannot be recorded in favour of any person. The learned counsel for the petitioner also concedes that unless the review application is disposed, the writ application cannot be taken up hearing on merit.

¶8

In that view of the matter, the petitioner is at liberty to appear before the learned Commissioner, Consolidation and

¶9

¶10

Settlement, Odisha, Bhubaneswar in the review application within fifteen days and file an application for expeditious hearing of the review application. In case, such an application is filed, the learned Commissioner shall do well to take up the hearing of the review application as expeditiously as possible and dispose of the same within a period of two months from the date of the appearance of the petitioner, i.e. opposite party in the review application.

¶11

List this matter on 31.08.2017.”

¶12

Pursuant to the said direction of this Court, the review petition was taken up and vide order dated 19.07.2017 taking into consideration the submission of learned Standing Counsel, the review petition (R.P. No. 66 of 2017) was dismissed under Annexure-8.

¶13

In that view of the matter, Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of dismissal of the review petition, the order passed in R.P. Case No.2138 of 2015 is revived.

¶14

Mr. Panda, learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State submits that he has no instruction with regard to the stage of the review petition filed by the Tahasildar, Khurda.

¶15

Taking into consideration the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered view that in the event of dismissal of the review petition filed against the order passed in R.P. Case No. 2138 of 2015, the Tahasildar, Khurda should

¶16

¶17

implement the same, if there is no legal impediment. Accordingly, it is directed that in the event the petitioner files an application for implementation of the order passed in R.P. Case No. 2138 of 2015 before the Tahasildar, Khurda enclosing a copy of the order of dismissal passed in R.P. Case No. 66 of 2017, the Tahasildar, Khurda shall examine the same and do the needful as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four months from the date of filing of such application along with an authenticated copy of this order downloaded from the website of the Orissa High Court giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned.

¶18

Authenticated copy of this order downloaded from the website of this Court shall be treated at par with certified copy in the manner prescribed in this Court’s Notice No.4587 dated 25.03.2020.

¶19

.................................

¶20

K.R. Mohapatra, J.

¶21

bks

Mahavir Prasad Ram v. Commissioner of Consolidaton

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahavir Prasad Ram v. Commissioner of Consolidaton

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhula Khadia Vs National Commission for Scheduled Tribes

surendra nath singh Vs bauri maharana

Jagannath Mohanty Vs State of Orissa

Nural Haque.Sahoo Vs C.R.P.F. and Ors.

Mrutyunjay Jena Vs State of Odisha

Ashok Kumar Das@Ashok Das Vs State of Odisha