Kulamani Sahoo Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Kulamani Sahoo Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of without entertaining the prayer; petitioner permitted fifteen working days to file an appeal under the O.P.L.E. Act with petitions for condonation of delay (if any) and interim protection before the appellate authority; no coercive action pursuant to the eviction notice until the interim application is taken up, subject to the condition that failure to file within the stipulated time forfeits the interim prayer.

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition filed by the petitioner (an encroacher) challenging the notice of eviction dated 12.08.2024 issued by the Tahasildar, Nischintakoili should be entertained by this Court, given the availability of a statutory remedy of appeal under the O.P.L.E. Act.

Court's answer

The Court declined to entertain the prayer made in the writ petition because a clear statutory remedy of appeal is available under the O.P.L.E. Act against the notice of eviction.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner was permitted to file an appeal, along with a petition for condonation of delay (if any) and a petition for interim protection, before the appellate authority under the O.P.L.E. Act within fifteen working days.

Key takeaways

Until the interim application to be filed by the petitioner is taken up, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner pursuant to the impugned notice of eviction (Annexure-1).ratio¶17
If the petitioner does not file the appeal along with the condonation and interim-protection petitions within the stipulated time, the authority concerned shall not entertain the interim prayer at all.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition by an encroacher challenging the notice of eviction dated 12.08.2024 (Annexure-1) issued by the Tahasildar, Nischintakoili in Encroachment Case No.8 of 2024-25 was not entertained, as a clear statutory remedy of appeal exists under the O.P.L.E. Act. The petitioner was permitted fifteen working days to file an appeal, with petitions for condonation of delay (if any) and interim protection, before the appellate authority; no coercive action pursuant to the impugned notice was to be taken until the interim application was taken up, failing timely filing of which the interim prayer would not be entertained. Petition disposed of. (Judge: Dr. S.K. Panigrahi)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C) No.22331 of 2024

Kulamani Sahoo …. Petitioner(s) Mr. Gagan Bihari Singh, Adv.

-versus-

…. State of Odisha Opposite Party(s) Mr. Dhananjaya Mund, AGA

CORAM:

DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI

ORDER Order

12.09.2024 No.

1 . This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.

2. In filing this Writ Petition, the Petitioner being an encroacher, has challenged the notice of eviction dated 12.08.2024/Annexure-1 issued by the Tahasildar, Nischintakoili/ Opposite Party No.4 in Encroachment Case No.8 of 2024-25.

3 . At the outset, learned counsel for the State submits that there is a clear statutory remedy of Appeal available under the O.P.L.E. Act against the notice of eviction/Annexure-1.

4. In such view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to entertain the prayer made in this Writ Petition. However, considering the request of learned counsel for the Signature Not Verified Petitioner, this Court permits the Petitioner to file an Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal AssistantReason: Authentication appeal along with a petition for condonation of delay, if Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 12-Sep-2024 17:10:07 any, so also a petition for interim protection before the

Page 1 of 2

appellate authority as per the provision of the O.P.L.E. Act, within a period of fifteen working days hence.

5. It is further directed that till the interim application to be filed by the Petitioner is taken up, no coercive action shall be taken against the Petitioner pursuant to the impugned notice of eviction / Annexure-1.

6. It is also made clear that if the Petitioner does not file appeal along with the above noted petitions within the time stipulated hereinabove, the authority concerned shall not entertain the interim prayer at all.

7. This Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of.

(Dr. S.K. Panigrahi) Judge

Ayaskanta

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 12-Sep-2024 17:10:07

Page 2 of 2