Disposed¶24

Sk.Bhura v. State

Orissa HC16 Oct 2025OJC/386/1998

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Sk. Bhura @ Abdul Hanif v. State of Odisha & others; OJC No.386 of 1998; High Court of Orissa at Cuttack; disposed 16.10.2025 by Justice Dixit Krishna Shripad (Order No.22); writ petition seeking mandamus against obstruction of passage to residential plot and for permanent settlement of land; Coordinate Bench order dated 05.11.1998; Orissa Government Land Settlement Act; government land in unit - X Dungapali; premium at prevailing market rate; Ac.0.065 decimals for shed; landless person; annual income exceeding Rs.11,000/-; application for grant of land on normative basis; memo filed by counsel; AGA S.B. Mohanty; counsel S.N. Mohapatra.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of on the agreed substratum of the 05.11.1998 Coordinate Bench order; liberty reserved to the petitioner to make appropriate application for grant of land on a normative basis.

Sk.Bhura Vs State — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed of on the agreed substratum of the 05.11.1998 Coordinate Bench order; liberty reserved to the petitioner to make appropriate application for grant of land on a normative basis.

¶24

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of mandamus should issue directing Opposite Party Nos.2, 3, 4 and 5 not to create any hindrance or obstruction on the passage to the petitioner's residential plot. +1 more

¶16

Ratio / Principle

On the submission of petitioner's counsel and without much objection from the learned AGA, the Court accepted that the substance of the Coordinate Bench order dated 05.11.1998 could be the substratum for disposal of this petition, reserving liberty to the petitioner to make appropriate application for the grant of land on a normative basis.

¶23

Key takeaways

In the above circumstances and observations, the OJC (OJC No.386 of 1998) is disposed of.ratio¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Orissa High Court (Justice Dixit Krishna Shripad, Order No.22, dated 16.10.2025) disposed of the old writ petition OJC No.386 of 1998 by Sk. Bhura @ Abdul Hanif, which had sought (i) mandamus restraining Opposite Party Nos.2-5 from creating hindrance or obstruction on the passage to the petitioner's residential plot and (ii) mandamus directing Opposite Party No.2 to settle the land permanently in his favour. Relying on common ground between counsel, the Court took the substance of a Coordinate Bench order dated 05.11.1998 as the substratum for disposal; that order had recorded that, on an application in the prescribed form under the Orissa Government Land Settlement Act, government land then available in unit - X Dungapali could be settled with the petitioner provided he paid premium at the prevailing market rate, with the Additional Government Advocate to disclose the basis for treating the petitioner as not landless with annual income exceeding Rs.11,000/-. Liberty was reserved to the petitioner to make appropriate application for grant of land on a normative basis, and the OJC was disposed of.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK OJC No.386 of 1998

¶2

Sk. Bhura @ Abdul Hanif ….

¶3

Petitioner

¶4

Represented by Adv.Mr. S.N. Mohapatra, Adv.

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha & others ….

¶7

Opposite Parties

¶8

Represented by Adv.Mr. S.B. Mohanty, AGA

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

JUSTICE DIXIT KRISHNA SHRIPAD

ORDER

16.10.2025

Order No. 22.

The petition prayer reads as under:

¶15

“In the facts and circumstances of the case it is therefore humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court be graciously pleased to admit the writ application, issue rule Nisi calling upon the Opp. parties to show cause as to why the prayers made hereunder shall not be allowed and upon showing insufficient cause/no cause make the said rule absolute and issue writ/writs in the nature of;

¶16

i) Mandamus directing the Opp. party Nos.2, 3,4 and 5 not to create any hindrance or obstruction on the passage to the residential plot of the petitioner;

¶17

ii) Mandamus directing the Opp. party No.2 to settle the lend permanently in favour of the petitioner;

¶18

This is a very old petition. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner draws attention of the Court to Coordinate Bench order dated 05.11.1998, which reads as under:

¶19

“This matter is not in today’s list but is being taken up on being mentioned.

¶20

Page 1 of 2

¶21

Learned Additional Govt. Advocate on the basis of instruction received from the Collector submits that if the petitioner makes an application in the prescribed form under the Orissa Government Land Settlement Act, Government land now available in unit – X Dungapali can be settled with him provided he is agreeable to pay the premium of the land of the prevailing market rate. Shri Mahapatra, leaned counsel for the petitioner, says that the petitioner may require Ac.0.065 decimals of land for the purpose of construction of shed. Learned Additional Government Advocate will take instruction as to what would be the position for the said land. He will also disclose the basis on which it is stated that the petitioner is not a landless person and his annual income exceeds Rs.11,000/-.

¶22

Put up this matter on 20.11.1998, as prayed for.”

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits and learned AGA appearing for the OPs does not much object that the substance of the above order can be the substratum for disposal of this petition, reserving liberty to the petitioner to make appropriate application for the grant of land in a normative basis. This is a happy development happening in the old matter. Memo to this effect is filed by counsel for the petitioner.

¶24

In the above circumstances and observations, the OJC is disposed of.

¶25

Web copy of the order to be acted upon by all concerned.

¶26

Signature Not Verified

¶27

Digitally Signed Signed by: PRASANT KUMAR SAHOO Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 17-Oct-2025 17:09:56

¶28

(Dixit Krishna Shripad) Judge

¶29

Prasant

¶30

Page 2 of 2

Sk.Bhura v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sk.Bhura v. State

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

Swastik Stevedors Vs State

Santosh Kumar Mohanty Vs State of Odisha

Jagyansenee Das Vs State of Odisha

Managing Committee of Saraswata Secondary School of Education and Vocational Studies, Puri Vs State of Odisha

Badri Narayan Ray Vs State of Odisha

Phiroj Kumar Mahapatra Vs State of Odisha