Dismissed

Nirmala Lala v. Chandini Samal

Orissa HC23 Feb 2021CONTC/81/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court dismissed a contempt petition alleging the respondent Tahasildar demolished the petitioner's structure in violation of a prior writ order. Based on the Sub-Collector's report that no demolition occurred and the encroachment case was pending, the court found no violation and dropped the petition.

What did the court decide?

The contempt petition was dropped as it was found to be without substance due to absence of violation.

Nirmala Lala Vs Chandini Samal — Contempt of Court | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

CORAM : HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE S.PUJAHARI

¶2

CONTC. No.81 of 2019

¶3

Nirmala Lala … Petitioner - versus - Chandini Samal … Opp. Party

¶4

ORDER

¶5

23.02.2021

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶7

The petitioner has filed this contempt case against the opposite party-Tahasildar, Panposh alleging that in defiance of the order passed in WPC No.21807 of 2018 on 21.12.2018, the said opposite party has demolished the structure raised by the petitioner without any order passed in the encroachment case.

¶8

As it appears in the Encroachment Case No.4/38/2018, the Tahasildar on the very day issued notice to the petitioner to show cause and also directed the petitioner to stop construction as well as eviction. Challenging the same, the petitioner had filed the aforesaid writ petition. As this Court found that there was violation of the principle of natural justice set aside the order of eviction and remitted the matter back to the Tahaildar to dispose of the said proceeding giving a chance of hearing to the

¶9

¶10

petitioner and take up the matter. After disposal of the aforesaid case, on 4.1.2019 the

¶11

Tahasildar stated to have visited the spot and demolished the structure made by the petitioner. Hence this contempt.

¶12

However, a counter affidavit has been filed indicating the fact that the encroachment case is pending and since the petitioner was directed not to make any construction over the Government land but she continued with the same, the Tahasildar visited the spot, seized the construction materials and the tools and implements used for construction but no eviction of her or demolition of any structure was made and as such this Court directed the SubCollector, Panposh to make an enquiry on the same. The Sub-Collector made an enquiry and found that no demolition of the structure has been made. The house constructed over the land in question is standing with electric connection and as such there is no defiance of the order passed in WPC No.21807 of 2018 by making any demolition during pendency of the encroachment proceeding. The said affidavit is on record.

¶13

On consideration of the aforesaid facts more particularly the report of the Sub-Collector, Panposh, this Court finds that encroachment case is stated to

¶14

¶15

be pending and the petitioner has not been evicted yet and there being no violation of the order passed in WPC No.21807 of 2018 much less without violation of the order passed by this Court in WPC No.21807 of 2018, hence the contempt petition filed being without substance stands dropped.

¶16

……..…………….. S.Pujahari, J.

¶17

PKS

Nirmala Lala v. Chandini Samal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nirmala Lala v. Chandini Samal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lalatendu Si Vs State of Odisha

Sabita Das Vs Malati Rout

Nibedita Patnaik Vs Sabdip Ku.Mishra

Sakir Vs State of Odisha

The Dist. Centre Owners Association Vs State of Odisha

Debasish Sen Vs State of Odisha