Disposed¶25

Nityananda Behera v. Collector and D.M.,Bhadrak

Orissa HC2 Sept 2024WP(C)/20990/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Nityananda Behera v. Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Bhadrak & Ors., W.P.(C) No. 20990 of 2024, High Court of Orissa, 02.09.2024, S.K. Panigrahi J. Eviction notice by Tahasildar, Tihidi; demolition of shop room; prior Division Bench eviction order in W.P.(C) No. 16584 of 2023; appeal pending before Sub-Collector, Bhadrak; direction for early disposal of appeal; interim relief under Section 12(4) OPLE Act; writ of Mandamus; Rule NISI; petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition disposed of; Opposite Party No.2/Sub-Collector, Bhadrak directed to dispose of the pending appeal (Appeal No.33 of 2024) at the earliest; petitioner given liberty to seek interim relief before the Appellate Authority under Section 12(4) of the OPLE Act. ¶25

Nityananda Behera Vs Collector and D.M.,Bhadrak — Orissa HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶25

Issue for consideration

Whether the notice under Annexure-1 for demolition/eviction of the petitioner's shop room should be kept in abeyance pending disposal of the appeal before the Appellate Authority (Sub-Collector, Bhadrak) and the demarcation case.

¶19

Court's answer

Since the Division Bench of this Court has already passed an order for eviction, this Court cannot overturn that order by passing any order in the present Writ Petition.

¶25

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner may approach the Appellate Authority/Sub-Collector, Bhadrak for early disposal of his pending appeal.

¶25

Key takeaways

Opposite Party No.2/Sub-Collector, Bhadrak is directed to take steps to dispose of the pending appeal at the earliest possible.ratio¶25
If the petitioner seeks any interim relief, he may approach the Appellate Authority/Sub-Collector, Bhadrak by filing an application under Section 12(4) of the OPLE Act.ratio¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Eviction/demolition notice — Writ petition against notice dated 12.07.2024 issued by Tahasildar, Tihidi for demolition/eviction of petitioner's shop room — Division Bench of the High Court had already ordered petitioner's eviction from the encroached land in W.P.(C) No. 16584 of 2023 (order dated 5.02.2024) and eviction process had commenced — Single Judge held it could not overturn the Division Bench order in the present writ petition — Petitioner's appeal (Appeal No.33 of 2024) pending before Sub-Collector, Bhadrak — Sub-Collector, Bhadrak (OP No.2) directed to dispose of the appeal at the earliest — Petitioner relegated to seek interim relief before the Appellate Authority by application under Section 12(4) of the OPLE Act — Writ Petition disposed of. (Dr. S.K. Panigrahi, J.; 02.09.2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No. 20990 of 2024

¶3

Nityananda Behera

¶4

..…... Petitioner(s)

¶5

Mr. Gyaneswar Satpathy, Adv.

¶6

-Versus-

¶7

Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Bhadrak & Ors.

¶8

………. Opposite Parties Mr. Ch. S. Mishra, AGA

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI

ORDER

02.09.2024

Order No.

This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.

¶16

Heard learned counsel for the Parties.

¶17

The present Writ Petition has been filed by the Petitioner with

¶18

the following prayer:

¶19

Under the above circumstances, it is therefore, humbly prayed that, this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue a Rule NISI in the nature writ of Mandamus &/or any other writ and/ or writs, direction and/ or directions, order and/ or orders calling upon the opposite parties to show cause as to why the notice under Annexure -1 regarding demolition /eviction of shop room shall not be kept in abeyance pending disposal of the Appeal before the Appellate Authority vide Appeal No-4/500/2023-24 and demarcation Case No.l4 of 2024. If the Opp. Parties failed to show cause & /or show insufficient &/or false cause make this said Rule NISI absolute;

¶20

And/or pass any other appropriate order as appear just and Signature Not Verified proper in the fitness of the case.

¶21

Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication 4. Le arn ed counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Division Location: High Court of Orissa Cuttack Date: 03-Sep-2024 10:51:41

¶22

Bench of this Court has already passed an order dated 5.02.2024 in

¶23

¶24

W.P.(C) No. 16584 of 2023 for evicting the petitioner from the encroached land and the eviction process has already started. He further submits that since the appeal is pending before the Opposite Party No.2/Sub-Collector, Bhadrak, the issuance of notice dated 12.07.2024 by the Opposite Party No.3/Tahasildar, Tihidi is illegal.

¶25

In such view of the matter, this Court is of the view that since the Division Bench of this Court has already passed an order for eviction, this Court cannot overturn the said order by passing any order in the present Writ Petition. However, since the Petitioner has already filed an appeal vide Appeal No.33 of 2024 before the Opposite Party No.2/Sub-Collector, Bhadrak and the same is still pending, the Petitioner may approach the Appellate Authority/Sub-Collector, Bhadrak for early disposal of the said appeal. Accordingly, the Opposite Party No.2/Sub-Collector, Bhadrak is directed to take steps to dispose of the said appeal at the earliest possible. If the Petitioner seeks for any interim relief, he can approach the Appellate Authority/Sub-Collector, Bhadrak by way of filing of an application under Section 12(4) of the OPLE Act. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶26

Signature Not Verified

¶27

Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Cuttack Date: 03-Sep-2024 10:51:41 ( Dr. S.K. Panigrahi) Judge

¶28

( Dr. S.K. Panigrahi)

¶29

Murmu

Nityananda Behera v. Collector and D.M.,Bhadrak

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nityananda Behera v. Collector and D.M.,Bhadrak

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Swastik Tanty @Swastik Kumar Tanty Vs State of Odisha

Prem Prakash Panigrahi Vs State of Odisha

Siddharth Shankar Mishra Vs State of Odisha

M/S Seven Hills Estates Ltd., Puri Vs Protiva Mondal

M/S Seven Hills Estates Ltd., Puri Vs Mousumi Gayen

M/S Seven Hills Estates Pvt. Ltd., Puri Vs Koushik Bhattacharjee