Disposed

Rubi Mahapatra v. the State of Odisha

Orissa HC20 May 2024WP(C)/9308/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

PIL seeking enforcement of the Collector's order barring heavy vehicles on an illegally constructed village road through Gramya Jungle and Gochar land. State reported compliance; the court disposed of the petition with an observation that dereliction by the Tahasildar could attract disciplinary action.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed based on State's compliance report; observation that non-compliance by Tahasildar could lead to disciplinary action.

Rubi Mahapatra Vs the State of Odisha — Environment and Pollution | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No. 9308 of 2024

¶3

Rubi Mahapatra

¶4

…. Petitioner

¶5

Mr. Amitav Tripathy, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

…. State of Odisha and others Opposite Parties Mr. L. Samantray, Additional Government Advocate

¶8

CORAM: THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

ORDER

Order No.

20.05.2024

This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.

¶14

The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner in the nature of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) to protect the interest of the villagers of Gunjabaran village in the district of Nayagarh seeking a direction to the Tahasildar, Odagaon to comply with an order dated 27.10.2023 passed by the Collector, Nayagarh.

¶15

The Collector, Nayagarh in his order dated 27.10.2023 was considering the difficulties being faced by the villagers of the said village due to operation of a crusher unit and movement of vehicles on an illegally constructed temporary road passing through Gramya Jungle and Gochar Kissam of land, operative portion of which reads as under:-

¶16

Hence in view of this, I direct that the alleged village road Puania and the temporary road constructed

¶17

Page 1 of 3

¶18

illegally on Gramya Jungle and Gochar Kissam of land not to be used for transportation of crushed materials in heavy vehicles. Tahasildar, Odagaon to ensure this and report compliance.”

¶19

It is noted that the said order of the Collector was passed while considering a representation filed by the petitioner in the light of this Court’s order dated 21.02.2023 passed in W.P.(C) No.4148 of 2023

¶20

Today, a counter affidavit has been filed by the opposite parties-State, sworn by the Tahasildar, Odagaon, paragraphs 4 and 5 of which read as under:

¶21

“4. That it is not correct to say that the O.P. No.5 has not taken any effective steps to comply with the said order of the Collector, Nayagarh (Annexure-2). As a matter of fact the O.P. No.5 after receipt of the order of the Collector, Nayagarh (Annexure-2) informed the RTO, Nayagarh and IIC, Sarankul P.S. to remain present on 14.03.2024 to implement the order of the Collector, Nayagarh (Annexure-2). Accordingly, the road involved in this case has been stopped/ blocked for plying of heavy vehicles. The copy of the report of implementation of the order of the Collector, Nayagarh (Annexure-2) containing the signatures of IIC, Sarankul P.S., Traffic Inspector, Office of the RTO, Nayagarh, Additional Tahasildar, Odagaon, Revenue Supervisor, Odagaon and the local Revenue Inspector vide letter No.810 dt. 14.03.2024 is annexed hereto as ANNEXURE-A/5.

¶22

5. That the aforesaid report regarding compliance of the order of the Collector, Nayagarh (Annexure-2) was also communicated to the Collector, Nayagarh for information and necessary action. So it is not correct to say that the O.P. No.5 has not taken any effective step for compliance of the order of the Collector, Nayagarh

¶23

Page 2 of 3

¶24

(Annexure-2). The plying of heavy vehicles through the subject village road has been stopped/ blocked. So there is no cause of action for the petitioner to file this case.”

¶25

Considering the statement made in paragraphs 4 and 5 of the counter affidavit, this writ petition is disposed of with an observation that if the Tahasildar, Odagaon is found to be not carrying out his duties in stopping the illegal movement of vehicles on the illegally constructed road in the concerned area, it shall be open for the competent authority to subject him to disciplinary action.

¶26

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh) Chief Justice

¶27

(M.S. Raman) Judge

¶28

S. Behera

¶29

Signature Not Verified

¶30

Page 3 of 3

¶31

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUMANTA BEHERA Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 21-May-2024 15:52:26

Rubi Mahapatra v. the State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rubi Mahapatra v. the State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sumati Pattnayak Vs Charan Nayak, Project Director,Kanpur Irrigation Project, Basudevpur, Keonjhar

Basanta Manjari Mohanty Vs Charan Nayak, Project Director Kanpur Irrigation Project, Basudevpur, Keonjhar

Banalata Dei Vs Siddharth Shankar Swain, I.A.S.

Banabihari Rath Vs State of Odisha

College of B.Sc Nursing Training, Baripada Vs State of Odisha

State of Odisha Vs Prasanta Kumar Nayak