Disposed

Sukanta Kumar Tripathy v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC20 Apr 2021WP(C)/4986/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging advance possession of government land for school construction where authorities allegedly encroached on petitioner's plot. Court directed demarcation with notice to petitioner before delivery of possession.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar to demarcate Plot No. 4016 by issuing notice to Petitioner and boundary tenants before delivery of advance possession.

Sukanta Kumar Tripathy Vs State of Odisha — Landlord and Tenant | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

W.P.(C) No. 4986 of 2021 1

¶2

20.04.2021 This matter is taken up through video conferencing

¶3

mode.

¶4

Heard Mr. Goutam Mukherji, learned Senior Advocate being assisted by Mr. Anam Charan Panda, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. Swayambhu Mishra, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State-Opposite Parties.

¶5

The Petitioner in this writ petition seeks for a direction to the Opposite Parties not to come over the Plot No. 4016 under Khata No. 2876 in mouza Andharua in the district of Khurda (for short ‘the case land’) till disposal of OSS Revision Case No. 219 of 2021 pending before the Member, Board of Revenue, Odisha, Cuttack.

¶6

Mr. Mukherji, learned Senior Advocate for the Petitioner submits that the case land was leased out in favour of one Muralidhar Samantaray and Bansidhar Bhola vide order dated 30^th November, 1965 passed in W.L. Case No. 844 of 1960-61. Despite the order passed in W.L. Case No. 844 of 1960-61 when the R.O.R. was not prepared in the name of said leaseholders, W.P.(C) No. 14363 of 2004 was filed by them, wherein a direction was made to file a mutation case before the concerned Tahasildar for recording of the case land in their name. Accordingly, Mutation Case No. 13285 of 2006 was filed. However, the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar vide his order dated 15^th February, 2006 dropped the mutation case in view of the ungoing settlement operation. The successors of the lessees challenged the said order dated 15^th February, 2006 before this Court in W.P.(C) No. 4934 of 2006, which was disposed of vide order

¶7

¶8

dated 20^th April, 2006 with an observation that since settlement operation is going on in mouza Andharua, the Petitioners therein may file appropriate application before Assistant Settlement Officer to consider their case in accordance with law. Accordingly, applications were filed by the successors of the lessees enclosing relevant documents in support of their case. The Assistant Settlement Officer taking into consideration the report of the field enquiry and on verification of the documents recommended for preparation of the R.O.R. in the name of successors of the lessees. While the matter stood thus, the Petitioner purchased the case land vide registered sale deed dated 15^th July, 2009 and filed Rent Objection Case No. 10034 of 2013. But the Assistant Settlement Officer vide order dated 15^th July, 2013 (Annexure-2) directed the case land to be recorded in Government Khata No. 2876, Plot No. 4016. Assailing the same, the Petitioner approached this Court in W.P.(C) No. 432 of 2020. In view of the fact that the mouza Andharua was by then finally published under Section 12-B of the Orissa Survey and Settlement Act, 1958 (for short ‘the Act’), this Court vide order dated 3^rd March, 2020 disposed of the said writ petition granting liberty to the Petitioner to file a revision under Section 15(b) of the Act. Accordingly, the Petitioner filed OSS Revision Case No. 219 of 2021, which is pending before the Member, Board of Revenue, Odisha, Cuttack. When the matter stood thus, the Opposite Party No. 1 vide letter dated 19^th October, 2020 under Annexure-4 granted permission to the Opposite Party No.2Collector, Khurda for processing alienation and to give advance possession of Government land measuring Ac.25.000 decimals in

¶9

¶10

favour of School and Mass Education Department for construction of Model School (Odisha Adarsha Vidyalaya) over Plot Nos. 3522, 3523, 3529, 3530 and 4001 under Khata No. 2874 in mouza Andharua.

¶11

Mr. Mukherji, learned Senior Advocate for the Petitioner referring to the settlement R.O.R. under Annexure-5 submitted that out of the aforesaid plots, Plot No. 4001 under Khata No. 2874 comprises an area of Ac.5.750 decimals only, but in the letter under Annexure-4, an area of Ac.13.000 decimals has been sanctioned for advance possession. It is contended that Plot No. 4016 under Khata No. 2876 situates to the adjacent southern side Plot No. 4001 of Khata No.2874. As such, the authorities in order to make good the short fall in the area of Plot No. 4001 are coming upon Plot No. 4016 and contemplating to deliver possession thereof for construction of Model School. Hence, the Petitioner finding no other alternative has filed this writ petition with the aforesaid prayer.

¶12

Mr. Mishra, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State referring to the counter affidavit filed by Opposite Parties 2 and 3 submits that there is an error in recording the area of Plot Nos. 4001 and 3522 of Khata No. 2874 in mouza Andharua for which steps are being taken up to file appropriate revision petition under Section 15(a) of the Act before the Member, Board of Revenue, Odisha, Cuttack for correction of the area. Apprehension of the Petitioner is baseless as no area of Plot No. 4016 is going to be delivered pursuant to the letter under Annexure-4. It is further contended that Plot No. 4016 does not find place in the letter

¶13

¶14

under Annexure-4. Hence, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.

¶15

Taking into consideration the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, it appears that there is a genuine dispute with regard to the area of Plot No. 4016 and Plot No. 3522 of Khata No. 2874. At present, the area of Plot No. 4001 as reflected in the R.O.R. under Annexure-5 is only Ac.5.750 decimals. Thus, unless the area of Plot No. 4001 is corrected following due process of law, an area of Ac.13.000 decimals from the said plot cannot be delivered to the School and Mass Education Department as sanctioned under Annexure-4. In view of the above, the apprehension of the Petitioner cannot be said to be baseless as Plot No. 4016 on which the Petitioner claims his right, title and interest situates adjacent to the said Plot No.4001. However, the dispute can be resolved, if Plot No. 4016 of Khata No. 2876 in mouza Andharua to an area of Ac.2.650 decimals is demarcated in presence of the Petitioner and other boundary tenants before advance possession of Plots as per letter under Annexure-4 is delivered to the School and Mass Education Department.

¶16

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar-Opposite Party No.3 to demarcate the Plot No. 4016 by issuing notice to the Petitioner and other boundary tenants to be present at the time of demarcation of the said plot before delivery of advance possession to the School and Mass Education Department for construction of Model School (Odisha Adarsha Vidyalaya).

¶17

¶18

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case of the Petitioner in OSS Revision Case No. 219 of 2021.

¶19

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.

¶20

……………………….

¶21

K.R.Mohapatra, J.

¶22

bks

Sukanta Kumar Tripathy v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sukanta Kumar Tripathy 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

Baishnab Ch.Sahu Vs Commnr.,Consolidn.

Usman Digal Vs State of Odisha

Prasanta Tripathy Vs State of Odisha

Firoj Ahamad @ Lalu Vs State of Odisha

Suratha Kumar Das Vs State of Odisha

Mahanta Adhikari Vs Commnr.,L.R.S.