Disposed

Ramakanta Satapathy v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC4 May 2022WP(C)/3414/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Orissa disposed of a writ petition seeking simultaneous demarcation of lands. Directed the petitioner to file a compliant application to trigger the Tahasildar's consideration, with a direction to the authority to hear both cases together if possible.

What did the court decide?

Directed petitioners to file a proper demarcation application within two weeks. Directed Tahasildar to consider the grievance upon filing and dispose of both demarcation cases simultaneously within ei

Ramakanta Satapathy Vs State of Odisha — Property and Title | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) NO. 3414 OF 2022

¶2

Ramakanta Satapathy …. Petitioner

¶3

Mr.Rath, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Gopinath Mishra, Advocate

¶4

-versus-

¶5

…. State of Odisha and others Opp. Parties Mr. Dillip Kumar Mishra,

¶6

Additional Government Advocate

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

04.05.2022

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶14

The Petitioner in this writ petition seeks for a direction to the Tahasildar, Satyabadi-Opposite Party No.3 to demarcate Hal Plot No. 572 to an extent of Ac.0.18 decimals under Hal Khata No.172 corresponding to Sabik Plot No. 728 under Sabik Khata No. 100 of mouza Solahala under Satyabadi Tahasil in the district of Puri (for short ‘the case land’) within a stipulated time.

¶15

It is submitted by Mr. Rath, learned counsel for the Petitioner that the adjacent land owner has filed an application for demarcation of Plot No. 597 to an extent of Ac.0.07 decimals under Khata No. 278 and the Petitioner has received the notice in the said demarcation case under Annexure-3 series. It is his submission that interest of justice will be best served, if both the lands are demarcated simultaneously. Although the Petitioner

¶16

Page 1 of 1

¶17

// 2 //

¶18

has submitted an application before the Tahasildar, Satyabadi in that regard, but no action has yet been taken and the Tahasildar, Satyabadi is proceeding with the demarcation of land of the adjacent land owner. As such, this writ petition has been filed for the aforesaid relief.

¶19

Mr. Mishra, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that admittedly the Petitioner has not filed an application for demarcation of the land in proper format enclosing required documents. In the event such an application is filed, the Tahasildar, Satyabadi will be in a position to consider the grievance of the Petitioner in accordance with law. 5. In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction that in the event the Petitioner files an application for demarcation of the land recorded in the name of his father in proper format complete in all respect along with certified copy of this order within a period of two weeks hence, the Tahasildar, SatyabadiOpposite Party No.3 shall consider and dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of eight weeks therefrom by issuing notice to the Petitioner as well as boundary tenants to participate in the hearing of the demarcation case and to be present at the time of demarcation of the land, if there is no legal impediment. It is further directed that in the event the Petitioner files an application for demarcation of the land within the time stipulated, as aforesaid, the Tahasildar, Satyabadi shall make an endeavour to dispose of both the demarcation cases filed by the Petitioner and his adjacent land owner simultaneously.

¶20

Page 2 of 2

¶21

// 3 //

¶22

A copy of this order be supplied to Mr. Mishra, learned Additional Government Advocate for communication and compliance.

¶23

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

¶24

bks

¶25

(K.R. Mohapatra) Judge

¶26

Page 3 of 2

Ramakanta Satapathy v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramakanta Satapathy 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

Dr. Jyoti Mitra Vs Pradeep Kumar Sahoo, Tahasildar, Bbsr, Khurda.

Ashok Ku.Das Vs I.G.of Police,Crpf

Mohan Sahu Vs Addl.Commissioner of Consolidation

Debasis Mohanty Vs State and Ors.

Abhay Ku.Nayak Vs I.G.of Policeops,C

Ajay Kumar Mishra Vs State of Odisha