Disposed

Kalandi Charan Sahoo v. Vijay Amruta Kulange, I.A.S.

Orissa HC2 May 2024CONTC/265/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt petition alleging violation of an order protecting a street vendor's vending unit from closure without due process under the Street Vendors Act, 2014. The Court found no deliberate disobedience, noting BMC's show cause that eviction was by the BDA under due process, and dropped the contempt proceeding.

What did the court decide?

Contempt proceeding dropped; petitioner left at liberty to take recourse to appropriate legal provisions against BDA's eviction.

Kalandi Charan Sahoo Vs Vijay Amruta Kulange, I.A.S. — Contempt of Court | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

CONTC No.265 of 2024

¶3

Sri Kalandi Charan Sahoo

¶4

…. Petitioner

¶5

M/s. S.K. Sahu, Advocate and associates -versus-

¶6

…. Vijay Amruta Kulange, IAS, Opposite Parties Commissioner, Bhubaneswar Municipal Corporation and another

¶7

Mr. B.K. Dash, Advocate

¶8

CORAM: THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

Order No.

ORDER 02.05.2024

This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.

¶13

The present contempt petition has been filed alleging violation of this Court’s order dated 12.04.2023 passed in W.P.(C) No.3374 of 2023.

¶14

The petitioner had filed the aforesaid writ petition seeking a direction to Bhubaneswar Municipal Corporation (BMC) not to close his vending unit at District Centre, Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar without due procedure of law as provided in the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court disposed of the said writ petition with the following direction:

¶15

“4. We are satisfied that BMC is aware of petitioner being a vendor at the vending site, for which he was issued aforesaid document. In the circumstances, instead of directing issuance of notice we make it clear that opposite party nos. 3 and 4, in event resort to taking action against petitioner, it must be in

¶16

Page 1 of 2

¶17

accordance with law provided for street vendors, including relocation.”

¶18

A show cause has been filed on behalf of the BMC stating therein that the petitioner does not have the certificate under the Act and therefore, the said provision has no application. He has relied upon a trade licence issued in his favour which cannot be treated as a certificate under the Act. It has been submitted that an action for petitioner’s eviction has been taken by the Bhubaneswar Development Authority (BDA) by following due process of law. It has further been submitted on behalf of the opposite parties that BDA was not impleaded as a party in the writ proceeding.

¶19

After having perused the order passed by this Court, violation of which has been alleged in the present contempt petition, and the show cause filed on behalf of the opposite parties-contemnors, and having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, we are of the view that no case of deliberate disobedience of this Court’s order dated 12.04.2023 passed in W.P.(C) No.3374 of 2023 is made out. The contempt proceeding is accordingly dropped.

¶20

It goes without saying that if the petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the BDA in evicting him, he shall be at liberty to take recourse to appropriate provision of law as may be permissible.

¶21

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh)

¶22

Chief Justice

¶23

(M.S. Raman)

¶24

Signature Not Verified

¶25

Judge

¶26

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBASH KUMAR GUIN S.K. Guin/P.A. Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 07-May-2024 15:35:50

¶27

Page 2 of 2

Kalandi Charan Sahoo v. Vijay Amruta Kulange, I.A.S.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kalandi Charan Sahoo v. Vijay Amruta Kulange, I.A.S.

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

Pitabash Nial Vs Alok Kar, Director (R and R), Ex Officio, Addl. Secy. to Govt., Water Resources, Odisha, Bbsr

Tularam Rana Vs Alok Kar, Director (R and R), Ex Officio, Addl. Secy. to Govt., Water Resources, Odisha, Bbsr

Tuladev Majhi Vs Alok Kar, Director (R and R),and Ex Officio, Addl. Secy. to Govt., Water Resources Dept.

Mithun Das Vs Vijay Amruta Kulange, I.A.S.

Prakash Mohanty Vs Vijay Amruta Kulange, I.A.S.

Manoj Das Vs Vijay Amruta Kulange, I.A.S.