Disposed
Pranabandhu Rout v. State of Odisha
Orissa HCWP(C)/12992/2021
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
This matter is taken up through Video…
What the court decided
AI extract
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P.(C) No.12992 of 2021
The Petitioner, by filing this writ application, has prayed for quashing the notice of eviction as at Annexure-1.
Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that this Petitioner has been in possession of the land in question since long and he having constructed one RCC roofed house over the same is residing with his family. He further submits that the Petitioner being a poor and landless person although has made a representation before the Opposite Party No.2 for settlement of a piece of land in accordance with law and the rules/guidelines in that regard, the same has not been disposed of and on the other hand by virtue of the order passed in Encroachment Case No.188 of 2021, he is now and then receiving the threat of eviction and demolition of his house, which he has built with much difficulty.
Learned counsel for the State submits that the Petitioner having paid the penalty imposed in the encroachment proceeding has accepted his possession of the land in question to be unauthorized. He further submits that the land, in question, is objectionable in nature and, therefore, the same cannot be settled in favour of the Petitioner.
= 2 =
Considering the submissions made and on going through the petition averments as also the documents annexed thereto, this writ application stands disposed of with an observation that the representation said to have been filed by the Petitioner as at Annexure-7 before the Opposite Party No.2, the same shall be considered in its proper prospective and disposed of early in accordance with law. In order to arrest the delay, the Petitioner is directed to submit a fresh representation within a period of seven days hence along with the downloaded copy of the order before the Opposite Party No.2 so as to further proceed in the matter as aforesaid.
As the restrictions due to the COVID-19 situation are continuing, learned counsel for the parties may utilize a soft copy of this order available in the High Court’s website or print out thereof at par with certified copy in the manner prescribed, vide Court’s Notice No.4587 dated 25th March, 2020.
……………………..
D. Dash, J.
H
Petitioner
Opposite Party No.2 (State)
Dash
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court