Disposed

Sasmita Sahu v. State of Orissa

Orissa HC16 Feb 2023WP(C)/5660/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court disposed of the Writ Petition by directing the petitioner to approach Opposite Party No.3 along with a copy of the Babita Padhy judgment within two weeks. The Opposite Party was directed to take a decision considering petitioner's case in light of the cited law within eight weeks and communicate it within two weeks thereafter without the Court opining on merits.

What did the court decide?

Order disposed; Petitioner directed to approach Opposite Party No.3 with Babita Padhy judgment; Opposite Party to decide in light of that law and communicate decision within ten weeks.

Sasmita Sahu Vs State of Orissa — Writ and Judicial Review | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.5666 of 2015

¶3

Sasmita Sahu

¶4

Petitioner

¶5

Mr.P.K.Mohanty, Sr. Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

State of Odisha and others

¶8

…. Opposite Parties Mr.N.K.Praharaj, A.G.A.

¶9

CORAM: JUSTICE A.K.MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

16.02.2023

1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as the learned Additional Government Advocate. Perused the Writ Petition as well as the documents annexed thereto.

¶15

The Writ Petition has been filed by the Petitioner with the following prayer:

¶16

“It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue Rule NISI in the nature of writ of Certiorari and/or any other appropriate writ and/or writs, direction and/or directions, order and/or orders, calling upon the Opp.Parties to show cause as to why the proceeding of U.V.M.C. No.781 of 2005 as per notice vide Annexure-2 issued by Opp.Party No.3 shall not be quashed.

¶17

And if the Opp.Parties fail to show cause and/or show insufficient and/or false cause make the said Rule absolute;

¶18

Page 1 of 2

¶19

// 2 //

¶20

And/or pass such other further order/orders as this Hon’ble Court deems just and proper and allow this Writ Application with cost.”

¶21

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the question involves in the present case was earlier before this Court in W.P.(C) No.20271 of 2014 which was decided on 05.12.2014 (in the matter of Babita Padhy –v.- State of Odisha and others). It is further contended by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the ratio decided in the aforesaid case is squarely applicable to the fact of the present case. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner has already approached the Stamp Collector & Additional Sub-Collector, Bhubaneswar , Opposite Party No.3 in U.V.M.C.No.781 of 2005 by filing his objection. Copy of the said objection has been annexed to the Writ Petition as Annexure-3. It is stated by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that after filing of objection no final decision has been taken.

¶22

Learned Additional Government Advocate on the other hand submitted that the Petitioner be directed to approach the Opposite Party No.3 along with a copy of the judgment in Babita Padhy case (supra). In the event the Petitioner approaches the Opposite Party No.3 within a stipulated period, the Opposite Party No.3 be directed to do the needful and pass necessary orders in the light of the ratio decided in the case of Babita Padhy (supra).

¶23

Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties and upon a careful consideration of the factual background of the present case, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, directs the Petitioner to approach the Opposite Party No.3 along with a copy of the judgment of this

Page 2 of 3

// 3 //

RKS

Court in Babita Padhy case (supra) within two weeks from today. In the even the Petitioner approaches the Opposite Party No.3, within the stipulated time, Opposite Party No.3 shall do well to consider the case of the Petitioner in the light of the law laid down in the case of Babita Padhy (supra) and take a decision within a period of eight weeks from the date of appearance of the Petitioner before Opposite Party No.3. The decision so taken shall be communicated to the Petitioner within two weeks thereafter. Opposite Party No.3 is further directed to act on production of certified copy of this order.

¶28

6. With the aforesaid observation, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

¶29

Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.
(A.K. Mohapatra)
Judge

¶30

Page 3 of 3

Sasmita Sahu v. State of Orissa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sasmita Sahu v. State of Orissa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kiran Sales Vs State

Sudam Gaigaria Vs State and Ors.

Gogua Grama Pachayat Vs State and Ors.

Bhagirathi Biswal Vs State and Ors.

Sarat Ch.Kabi Vs State and Ors.

Abhijit Ku.Baghsingh Vs C.H.S.E.,Orissa