Dismissed

Prabhat Kumar Baksi v. Sub Collector, Sundargarh

Orissa HC19 Mar 2024WA/266/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Intra-court appeal challenging disposal of a writ petition in favour of the alternative remedy under Section 59(1) of the Odisha Land Reforms Act. The court found no infirmity in that direction, dismissed the appeal, and granted liberty to raise legal questions before the revisional authority with liberal limitation consideration.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file revision under Section 59(1) OLR Act within 30 days; revisional authority to consider limitation liberally.

Prabhat Kumar Baksi Vs Sub Collector, Sundargarh — Land Acquisition | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.A. No.266 of 2024

¶3

Prabhat Kumar Baksi

¶4

… Appellant

¶5

Ms. Adisha Mohanty, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

Sub-Collector, Sundargarh and Others

¶8

… Sub-Collector, Sundargarh and Others Respondents Mr. Debakanta Mohanty, Addl. Govt. Advocate Mr. Soumendra Pattnaik, Advocate

¶9

CORAM: THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

Order No.

ORDER 19.03.2024

This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.

¶14

The appellant in the present intra-Court appeal has put to challenge an order of a learned Single Judge of this Court dated 24.01.2024 passed in W.P.(C) No.31138 of 2022 whereby the petitioner’s writ petition has been disposed of in the light of alternative remedy available to him under Section 59(1) of the Odisha Land Reforms Act,1960 (OLR, Act).

¶15

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has very vehemently argued that the learned Single Judge ought to have addressed the legal issues raised in the writ petition. Further after two years, the matter ought not to have relegated to the revisional remedy under Section 59(1) of the OLR Act.

¶16

Page 1 of 2

¶17

We do not find any legal infirmity in the impugned order whereby the appellant has been granted a liberty to approach the revisional authority under Section 59(1) of the OLR Act. We see no reason why the appellant would have been allowed to pursue his remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution of India instead of invoking statutory remedy under section 59(1) of the OLR Act before the revisional authority.

¶18

We do not find any merit in the appeal, which is, accordingly, dismissed. We, however, make it clear that the appellant shall have liberty to raise legal questions before the revisional authority, which were raised by him in the writ petition. Further, if the appellant files the revision application under Section 59(1) of the OLR Act within 30 days from today, the revisional authority shall liberally consider the question of limitation keeping in mind the fact that the appellant was pursuing his remedy before this Court by filing a writ petition and the present intra-Court appeal.

¶19

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh) Chief Justice

(M.S. Raman)

Judge

S.K.Jena/Secy

Signature Not Verified

¶24

Digitally Signed Signed by: SANJAY KUMAR JENA Designation: SECRETARY Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 21-Mar-2024 11:40:01

¶25

Page 2 of 2

Prabhat Kumar Baksi v. Sub Collector, Sundargarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prabhat Kumar Baksi v. Sub Collector, Sundargarh

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

M/S. Magnum Sea Foods Ltd. Bbsr Vs State of Odisha

Upendra Kumar Roul Vs State of Odisha

Chandramani Mohapatra Vs Chairman and Md, Bharat Petroleum Corp. Ltd., Mumbai

State of Odisha Vs Basant Manjari Pahi

Dhurba Charan Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Laxmidhar Sahoo Vs State of Odisha