Disposed¶27

Bansidhar Malik v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC5 Sept 2024WP(C)/22026/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Land settlement; OPLE Act 1972 Section 8(A); statutory/alternative remedy in writ petition; Khata No.416 Plot No.73 A0.0430 dec. Mouza Santospur Shergada Tahasil; Tahasildar Sheragada; impugned notice Annexure-2; application within 10 working days; disposal within 60 days; no coercive action pending consideration; disposed without merits; High Court of Orissa at Cuttack; W.P.(C) No. 22026 of 2024; Dr. S.K. Panigrahi; 05.09.2024.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to approach the Tahasildar, Sheragada for settlement of the land in question under Section 8(A) of the OPLE Act, 1972 by filing an application within 10 working days; the application to be disposed of within 60 days thereafter in accordance with law; no coercive action against the Petitioner till the matter is taken up by the Tahasildar, Sheragada. ¶27

Bansidhar Malik Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶27

Issue for consideration

Whether the Court should direct the Opposite Parties to settle the land bearing Khata No.416, Plot No.73 measuring an area A0.0430 dec. of Mouza Santospur under Shergada, Tahasil in favour of the Petitioner. +1 more

¶16

Ratio / Principle

Without going into the merit of the case, the Court disposed of the petition on the basis of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, including the availability of a statutory remedy under Section 8(A) of the OPLE Act, 1972.

¶18

Key takeaways

The Court directs the Petitioner to approach the Tahasildar, Sheragada (Opposite Party No.4) for settlement of the land in question as per Section 8(A) of the OPLE Act, 1972, by filing an application within 10 working days.ratio¶19
The Petitioner's application under Section 8(A) of the OPLE Act, 1972 shall be disposed of within a period of 60 days thereafter in accordance with law.ratio¶25
If the Petitioner approaches the Tahasildar, Sheragada within the stipulated time, no coercive action shall be taken against the Petitioner till the matter is taken up by the Tahasildar, Sheragada.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (W.P.(C) No. 22026 of 2024, High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, Dr. S.K. Panigrahi, J., order dated 05.09.2024) in which Bansidhar Malik sought a direction to the Opposite Parties to settle land bearing Khata No.416, Plot No.73, admeasuring A0.0430 dec. of Mouza Santospur under Shergada Tahasil in his favour. Without going into the merits, and acting on the State counsel's submission that a statutory remedy existed against the impugned notice/Annexure-2, the Court disposed of the petition by directing the Petitioner to approach the Tahasildar, Sheragada under Section 8(A) of the OPLE Act, 1972 by filing an application within 10 working days, to be disposed of within 60 days thereafter in accordance with law; interim protection from coercive action was granted until the Tahasildar takes up the matter.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No. 22026 of 2024

¶3

Bansidhar Malik

¶4

..…... Petitioner(s)

¶5

Mr. S.N. Sahu, Adv.

¶6

-Versus-

¶7

State of Odisha & Ors. ………. Opposite Parties Mr. Ch. S. Mishra, AGA

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI

ORDER

05.09.2024

Order No.

This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶16

In this Writ Petition, the Petitioner seeks a direction from this Court to the Opposite Parties to settle the land bearing Khata No.416, Plot No.73 measuring an area A0.0430 dec. of MouzaSantospur under Shergada, Tahasil in his favour.

¶17

During course of hearing learned counsel for the State submits that there is a clear statutory remedy available under Section 8 (A) of the OPLE Act,1972 against the impugned notice/Annexure-2.

¶18

Considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the parties and without going into the merit of the case, this Court

¶19

directs the Petitioner to approach the Opposite Party

¶20

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMUNo.4/Tahasildar, Sheragada for settlement of the land in question No.4/Tahasildar, Sheragada for settlement of the land in question

¶21

Signed by: LITARAM MURMUNo.4/Tahasildar, Sheragada for settlement of the land in question No.4/Tahasildar, Sheragada for settlement of the land in question Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa CuttackDate: 06-Sep-2024 19:05:44in his fav our as per the provision under Section 8(A) of the OPLE

¶22

Act, 1972 by filing of an application within 10 working days hence

¶23

Murmu

¶24

¶25

and the said application of the Petitioner shall be disposed of within a period of 60 days thereafter in accordance with law.

¶26

It is further directed that, if the Petitioner approaches the Tahasildar, Sheragada as per the above noted provision within the time stipulated herein above, no coercive action shall be taken against the Petitioner, till the matter is taken up by the Tahasildar, Sheragada.

¶27

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶28

( Dr. S.K. Panigrahi)

¶29

Judge

¶30

Signature Not Verified

¶31

Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Cuttack Date: 06-Sep-2024 19:05:44

Bansidhar Malik v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bansidhar Malik v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rupa Rai Vs State of Odisha

Manjulata Nayak Vs State of Odisha

Brahmananda Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Hemanta Kumar Nahak Vs State of Odisha

Soudamini Tripathy Vs State of Odisha

Chandra Sekhar Panda Vs State of Odisha