Disposed

Niranjan Das v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC7 Sept 2021WP(C)/12740/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging a Tahasildar's demarcation proceeding and a related interlocutory application. The court observed that it was premature to quash the proceedings before objections were formally raised by the petitioner within a specified time.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file an objection before the Tahasildar within two weeks justifying why the demarcation case should not proceed.

Niranjan Das Vs State of Odisha — Land Acquisition | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.12740 OF 2019

¶3

Niranjan Das …. Petitioner

¶4

Mr. Samarendra Bahadur, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha and others

¶7

…. Opp. Parties Mr. Swayambhu Mishra, Additional Standing Counsel (For Opposite Party Nos.1 to 3) Mr. B.K. Routray, Advocate (For Opposite Party No.4)

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

07.09.2021

I. A. No.12920 of 2020

¶14

& W.P.(C) No.12740 of 2019

¶15

¶16

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶17

The I.A. has been filed by the Opposite Party No.4 for

¶18

expeditious hearing of the demarcation case.

¶19

It is submitted by Mr. Routray, learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.4 that due to pendency of the writ petition, demarcation of land in question in Misc. Case No.8 of 2019 pending before the Tahasildar, Niali-Opposite Party No.3 could not be taken up as yet.

¶20

In view of the above, though the matter was listed for orders, the same is taken up for hearing and final disposal.

¶21

The writ petition has been filed to quash the proceeding in Misc. Case No.8 of 2019 pending before the Tahasildar, Niali-Opposite Party No.3 for demarcation of Plot Nos.1077 and 1078 under Khata No.59 of Mouza-Baharana under Niali Tahasil in the district of Cuttack.

¶22

Page 1 of 3

¶23

// 2 //

¶24

It is submitted by Mr. Bahadur, learned counsel for the Petitioner that relating to the self-same plot, R.P. Case No.137 of 2019 filed under Section 15(b) of the Orissa Survey & Settlement Act, 1958 is pending before the Joint Commissioner, Consolidation and Settlement, Odisha, Cuttack. Thus, the Tahasildar, Niali could not have proceeded with the matter for demarcation of the land. Upon receipt of the notice in the demarcation case, although the Petitioner filed his objection to the said demarcation case, the Tahasildar, Niali without considering the same, is proceeding ahead for demarcation of the land in question. Hence, this writ petition has been filed for the aforesaid relief.

¶25

Mr. Routray, learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.4 vehemently objected to the same. It is his submission that no objection whatsoever has been filed by the Petitioner. If, at all, any objection is filed, the same will be considered in accordance with law. Thus, the writ petition is premature and should not be entertained.

¶26

Mr. Mishra, learned Additional Standing Counsel also supports the submission of learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.4 and contends that when the demarcation case is still pending before the Tahasildar, Niali as stated in the writ petition, the Petitioner is free to raise his objection with regard to maintainability of the same. Thus, this writ petition being premature is liable to be dismissed.

¶27

Taking into consideration the rival contentions of learned counsel for the parties, this Court disposes of the I.A. as well as the writ petition with an observation that in the event the Petitioner files an objection before the Tahasildar, Niali-

Page 2 of 3

// 3 //

Opposite Party No.3 stating the reasons not to proceed with the demarcation case in Misc. Case No.8 of 2019 within a period of two weeks hence, he shall do well to consider the same and pass a reasoned order thereon before proceeding with the demarcation of the land in question, if any.

¶32

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

¶33

Judge

¶34

Page 3 of 3

Niranjan Das v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Niranjan Das v. State of Odisha

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

Indramani Samal Vs Raghunath Samal

Pramod Ku.Khuntia Vs Pravat K.Mohapatra

Kasinath Das Vs Addl.Commissioner Settlement and Consolidation

Anup Kumar Chandan Vs Dillip Machhkhand

Lalit Deep Vs Anup Kumar Chandan

Sasmita Das Vs State of Odisha