Dismissed

Alok Patra v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC26 Aug 2021WP(C)/21209/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged an eviction notice in a writ petition seeking protection of possession. Court held the writ was not maintainable as the statutory remedy under the OPLE Act was available. Petition dismissed; encroachment appeal order to remain in abeyance for six weeks to enable revision.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed with observation that the impugned order be kept in abeyance for six weeks to enable the petitioner to file a revision.

Alok Patra Vs State of Odisha — Land Acquisition | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.21209 OF 2021

¶3

Alok Patra

¶4

…. Petitioner Mr. S.S.Das, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha and others

¶7

…. Opp. Parties Mr. Dhananjaya Mund, Additional Government Advocate

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

26.08.2021

This matter is taken up through video conferencing mode.

¶15

Petitioner, in this writ petition, seeks to assail the notice dated 8^th July, 2021 (Annexure-1) issued by Tahasildar, Danagadi-Opposite Party No.4 directing the Petitioner to vacate Plot No.600 under Khata No.42 to an extent of Ac.0.30 decimal, kisam Jungle in mouza Panubahali in the district of Jajpur (for short, ‘the case land’).

¶16

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the said notice was issued pursuant to order passed in Encroachment Case No.212 of 2021 and Encroachment Appeal No.22 of 2021.

¶17

In course of hearing, Mr.Das, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that although the Petitioner has a remedy of filing revision against the order passed in Encroachment Appeal No.22 of 2021, but in view of the notice under Annexure-1, he is apprehending eviction from the case land, where he is residing by constructing house thereon for last thirty years. He, therefore,

¶18

Page 1 of 2

¶19

prays for withdrawal of the writ petition to file Revision and also prays to protect his possession till disposal of the revision.

¶20

Mr.Mund, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that since the Petitioner has remedy under Section 12(2) of the OPLE Act, 1972 to file revision against the order passed in Encroachment Appeal No.22 of 2021 and pray for interim protection, this writ petition is not maintainable.

¶21

Taking into consideration the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court disposes of the writ petition with an observation that the Petitioner may avail remedy under Section 12(2) of the OPLE Act, 1972 assailing the order passed in Encroachment Appeal No.22 of 2021. In order to enable the Petitioner to file revision and move interim application, the order passed in Encroachment Appeal No.22 of 2021 shall be kept in abeyance for a period of six weeks, if the same has not been implemented in the meantime.

¶22

Issue urgent certified copy of the order on proper application.

¶23

s.s.satapathy

¶24

Page 2 of 2

Alok Patra v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Alok Patra 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

Benudhar Patra Vs Babaji Patra

Sk.Nuri Vs State of Odisha

Nrusingh Charan Dash Vs Commnr., C and S, Orissa

M/S.Shri Mahavir Ferro Alloys Pvt.Ltd. Vs Assessing Officer,Exe.Engineer(Electrical)

Roga @ Jadunatha Mohapatra Vs Sankarshan Mohapatra

Kamala Kanta Nayak Vs Birendra Nath Dhal