Disposed

Bijay Kumar Khatua v. Collector, Mayurbhanj

Orissa HC25 Feb 2020WP(C)/4800/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging an eviction order under the Odisha Public Premises Act, 1972. Finding an efficacious alternative remedy under Section 9, the court granted liberty to appeal while maintaining the status quo pending the appeal and inter-mediate relief.

What did the court decide?

Granted liberty to file appeal under Section 9; status quo maintained pending appeal or interim order.

Bijay Kumar Khatua Vs Collector, Mayurbhanj — Property and Title | Orissa HC (2020)

¶1

W.P.(C) NO. 4800 OF 2020

¶2

25.02.2020 The petitioner by filing this writ application has prayed for a quashment of order dated 24.01.2020 passed by the Sub-Collector-cum-Estate Officer, Baripada-opposite party no.2 in O.P.P.(EUO) Case No. 35 of 2019 in the matter of a proceeding initiated under section-4 of the Odisha Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1972.

¶3

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the petitioner has been in possession of the land in question much prior to the coming into force of the Odisha Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, the proceeding under the said Act is not maintainable in the eye of law. He therefore submits that the impugned order passed by the Authority is without jurisdiction and nonest in the eye of law.

¶4

Learned Additional Government submits that the order which has been impugned in this writ application is appealable as provided under section 9 of the Act and therefore in view of the availability of the alternative efficacious remedy, this writ application is not maintainable.

¶5

Considering the submission made and on going through the averments taken in the petition as well as the documents annexed thereto; this writ application stands disposed of granting the liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal under section 9 of Odisha Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act in challenging the order of eviction passed by the Sub-

¶6

= 2 =

¶7

Collector-cum-Estate Officer, Baripada-opposite party no.2 in O.P.P.(EUO) Case No. 35 of 2019 by presenting the memorandum of appeal within a period of three weeks hence. It is further observed that in the event the memorandum of appeal is presented before the Appellate Authority within the time as above stipulated, the same shall be considered on merit and disposed of in accordance with law.

¶8

It is open for the petitioner to file an application before the said Appellate Authority seeking an interim order in respect of the property(s), in question, during pendency of the appeal and if such application is filed with the memorandum of appeal, the same shall considered on merit and disposed of in accordance with law.

¶9

Status-quo in respect of the land(s) in question as it stands today shall be maintained till disposal of that interim application or the appeal, whichever is earlier.

¶10

Issue urgent certified copy as per the rules.

¶11

……………………..

¶12

D. Dash, J.

¶13

Narayan

Bijay Kumar Khatua v. Collector, Mayurbhanj

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bijay Kumar Khatua v. Collector, Mayurbhanj

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

Chaitanya Bhoi Vs Guthulu Bhoi

Santosh Ku.Jena Vs Varsha Jena

Agar Chand Bahety Vs State of Orissa

Ashis Bhoi Vs State of Odisha

Fakir Mohan Nayak Vs State of Odisha

Shyam Sundar Behera Vs State of Orissa