Dismissed

Sukanti Sahoo v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC21 Jun 2021WP(C)/13739/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ challenge against an eviction order. The Court held no infirmity existed as the Collector directed eviction following due process under the Municipal Act. The Executive Officer instructed to act in accordance with the Odisha Municipal Act and Rules.

What did the court decide?

The collect that the Executive officer shall abide by the Collector's order and ensure actions are in accordance with the Odisha Municipal Act and Rules.

Sukanti Sahoo Vs State of Odisha — Municipal and Town Planning | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

W.P.(C) NO.13739 OF 2021

¶2

21.06.2021

¶3

This matter is taken up by virtual mode. Heard.

¶4

The Order of the Collector, Nayagarh dated 08.01.2021 vide Annexure- 6, directing the Executive Officer, Nayagarh Municipality to evict the petitioners following due process of law, has been impugned in the present writ application.

¶5

Earlier, W.P.(C) No.12917 of 2019 was filed by 10 of the petitioners and it was disposed of on 30.07.2019, directing the Collector, Nayagarh to take a decision on Annexure-5 to that writ application. In obedience to the said order, the Collector has disposed of the petitions and has directed the Executive Officer, Nayagarh Municipality to evict the petitioners following due process of law.

¶6

In the present writ application, however, 9 petitioners, who were not parties to W.P.(C) No.12917 of 2019, have come forward to challenge the order vide Annexure- 6.

¶7

It is alleged by learned counsel for the petitioners that, on behalf of the Executive Officer, Nayagarh Municipality, a notice was affixed on the outside wall of the houses of each of the petitioners asking them to vacate the land within 24 hours. Such action was taken in January, 2021, as submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners. However, no copy of

¶8

such notice has been annexed to the writ application. As the Collector, Nayagarh has passed the order asking the Executive Officer to evict the petitioners by following the due process of law as per the Municipal Act, I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order vide Annexure- 6.

¶9

Accordingly, the writ application is disposed of with the observation that, the Executive Officer, Nayagarh Municipality shall abide by the order passed by the Collector, Nayagarh and whatever action he shall take, shall be in accordance with due process, as enshrined in the Odisha Municipal Act and Rules made thereunder.

¶10

No arbitrary action shall be taken against

¶11

the petitioners.

¶12

The writ application is accordingly disposed of.

¶13

As the restrictions due to resurgence of COVID-19 situation are continuing, learned counsel for the parties may utilize a printout of the order available in the High Court’s website, at par with certified copy, subject to attestation by the concerned advocate, in the manner prescribed vide Court’s Notice No.4587 dated 25^th March, 2020 as modified by Court’s Notice No.4798 dated 15^th April, 2021.

………………………….

Subha

C.R. Dash, J.

Subha

Sukanti Sahoo v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sukanti Sahoo 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Amarendra Kumar Chakra Vs State of Odisha

Surendra Kumar Parida Vs the Chief G.M., R.B.I

Santosh Kumar Dash Vs Principal Secy. to Govt. of Odisha

Ananta Singha @ Singh Vs State of Odisha

Debendra Sahu @ Ratan Sahu Vs State of Odisha

Moheswar Mohanty Vs State of Odisha