Disposed

Narugopala Behera v. State and Ors.

Orissa HC13 Mar 2023WP(C)/10470/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of this writ petition seeking quashing of a show-cause notice. The Court directed the Odisha State Housing Board to consider the petitioner's grievance and decide on land allotment within four months.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Odisha State Housing Board to consider the petitioner's grievance and allot the land within four months.

Narugopala Behera Vs State and Ors. — Land Acquisition | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 10470 of 2014

¶2

Narugopala Behera

….. Petitioner

Mrs. S. Jena, Adv.

Vs.

State of Orissa and others …..

¶7

Opposite Parties

¶8

Mr. J.P. Pattnaik, GA

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMAN

¶11

ORDER 13.03.2023

¶12

Order No.

¶13

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶14

¶15

Heard Mrs. S. Jena, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. J.P. Pattnaik, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State-opposite parties.

¶16

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking to quash the notice of show cause dated 15.05.2014 under Annexure-5 issued by the Odisha State Housing Board, and to issue direction to the opposite parties to settle the land in favour of the petitioner within a stipulated time.

¶17

Mrs. S. Jena, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is in occupation of the land for more than 30 years and, therefore, the same can be settled in favour of the petitioner. It is further contended that though the petitioner approached the authority for settlement of the land, but it has been brought to the notice of the petitioner that the land has been transferred to the Odisha State Housing Board. As a consequence thereof, the notice of show cause dated 15.05.2014 has been issued by the Odisha State Housing Board to the petitioner under

¶18

Page 1 of 3

¶19

Annexure-5 for eviction. It is contended that the petitioner is willing to occupy the land on settlement and whatever amount will be determined by the authority, the petitioner is willing to deposit the same instead of facing eviction.

¶20

Mr. J.P. Pattnaik, learned Government Advocate, on the other hand, contended that the land in question has already been allotted to Odisha State Housing Board. Therefore, the grievance of the petitioner can only be considered by the Board with regard to land occupied by the petitioner, but not the State Government.

¶21

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, this Court finds that the petitioner is in occupation of the land for more than 30 years, as stated by Mrs. S. Jena, learned counsel for the petitioner, and, as such, the petitioner is interested to settle the land, which has not yet been done. As such, in the meantime, the State Government has already transferred the land in favour of Odisha State Housing Board. Therefore, it is open to the petitioner to approach the Odisha State Housing Board for settlement of the land on the basis of premium fixed by the Board. Needless to say, similar question had come up for consideration before this Court in W.P.(C) No. 13965 of 1999, W.P.(C) No. 13222 of 2005 and W.P.(C) No. 4338 of 2002 and all those writ petitions were heard analogously and disposed of by the common judgment dated 21.07.2008, wherein this Court observed that since the Government has allotted the land to the Housing Board, it is open to the Housing Board to consider the grievance of the petitioner and to take a decision for allotment of the land to the association in accordance with law within a period of four months.

¶22

In the above view of the matter, since similar matters have

¶23

Page 2 of 3

¶24

already been disposed of, this writ petition stands disposed of directing Odisha State Housing Board to consider the grievance of the petitioner and take a decision for allotment of the land to the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of four months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶25

Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.

¶26

(DR. B.R. SARANGI) JUDGE

¶27

Ashok

¶28

(M.S. RAMAN) JUDGE

¶29

Page 3 of 3

Narugopala Behera v. State and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narugopala Behera v. State and Ors.

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

Anjana Mallick Vs State and Ors.

Biswanath Behera Vs State and Ors.

Duryodhan Das Vs State and Ors.