Dismissed¶27

Chandi Prasad v. Addl.Dist.Magistrate

Orissa HC18 Sept 2025OJC/5265/1997

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Orissa HC (Cuttack), O.J.C No.5265 of 1997, decided 18.09.2025 by Justice Dixit Krishna Shripad — dismissed writ against rejection of residential plot allotment in Rourkela Civil Township (Area Nos. 7 and 8) where Ac.0.112 in Khata No.995 T.U. No.35 stood in the petitioner's father's name; no-prejudice holding that denial of hearing caused no consequence since hearing would not have altered the fact matrix; natural justice 'cannot be chanted like Vedic Mantra' — consequential-factors approach, relying on S.L. Kapoor v. Jagmohan, AIR 1981 SC 136.

What did the court decide?

Indulgence is declined because a hearing would not have changed the fact matrix that the land admeasuring Ac.0.112 in Khata No.995 T.U. No.35 stands recorded in the name of the petitioner's father. ¶24

Chandi Prasad Vs Addl.Dist.Magistrate — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

O.J.C No.5265 of 1997

¶3

Shri Chandi Prasad Sarnagi

¶4

…. Petitioner

¶5

Mr. S. K. Sarangi, Sr. Advocate

¶6

-Versus-

¶7

ADM, Rourkela and Another

¶8

…. Opposite Parties

¶9

Mr. S.K. Jee, AGA

¶10

CORAM:

¶11

JUSTICE DIXIT KRISHNA SHRIPAD

ORDER

Order No. 06.

18.09.2025

The short grievance of the petitioner is against the rejection of land allotment. The said order dated 03.03.1997 is at Annexure-2. It being too short and too sweet also is reproduced for easy reference:

¶16

“LEASE. Case No.134 of 1997 Notice No.994 dated 3.3.97 To Sri /Smt. Chandi prasad Sarangi, S/o Bhudev Sarangi, Plantsite Road ,Rourkela Dist-Sundargarh. Ref:- This office letter No.2525/ Dated 24.9.93

¶17

On subsequent decision of the Land Allotment Committee meeting dated 24.12.1996 after due verification of report/documents/ your application bearing No.1950 for allotment of residential plot in area No.7 and 8 of Rourkela Civil Township has been rejected by the Land Allotment Committee on the ground noted below.

¶18

As per report of the Addl. Tahasildar, Rourkela an area of ac.0.112 in khata No.295 Town Unit No.35 recorded in the name of your father.”

¶19

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner vehemently argues that the rejection sans an opportunity of hearing and therefore is violative of principles of natural justice. When asked

¶20

Page 1 of 3

¶21

as to whether the contents of the second part of the impugned order are true, very fairly the counsel on record answers in the affirmative.

¶22

A specific contention at paragraph-5 of the counter is taken up by the other side, which reads as under:

¶23

“ That with regard to facts and averments made in Paragraph 5 & 6 of the writ application, it is humbly submitted by the deponent that the Lease Application Form No.1950 was filed by the petitioner as Category 1 on 7.1.92 for allotment of residential plot in area Nos.7 and 8 of Rourkela Civil Township in response to the Notification No.2713 dt.25.11.91 issued for the purpose. The said application was placed before the Land Allotment Committee which was held on 2.7.93, 3.7.93 and 31.7.93 along with other valid applications for allotment of lands in an Area Nos.7 and 8 of Rourkela Civil Township. It had been decided that if any allottee or allottees are found to be ineligible or have suppressed informations/particulars or submitted false certificate, affidavits etc., the allotment would be cancelled. It was further decided by the Land Allotment Committee that the allottees will have to file fresh affidavits indicating that they do not have any land or building in Rourkela Civil Townships area either in their name or in the name of their family members. The Opp. Party No.1 had been authorized by the Land Allotment Committee to make verification of the applications with reference to the records of the Tahasildar/Housing Board/Rourkela Development Authority, Rourkela. The application of the petitioner along with report of the Addl. Tahasildar, Rourkela was placed in meeting of the Land Allotment Committee held on 24.12.96. The Land Allotment Committee decided not to allot residential plot in favour of the petitioner as an area of AC.0.112 in Khata No.995 T.U. No.35 is recorded in the name of his father. The deponent respectfully submits that the Land Allotment Committee have carefully considered the application of the petitioner along with other documents and on proper application of mind, came to the conclusion not to allot plot in favour of the petitioner.”

¶24

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the petition papers, this Court declines indulgence in the matter, inasmuch as hearing would not have changed the fact

¶25

Page 2 of 3

¶26

matrix that the land admeasuring Ac.0.112 in Khata No.995 T.U. No.35 is recorded in the name of Petitioner’s father. The principles of natural justice cannot be chanted like ‘Vedic Mantra’. The system has moved from ritualistic adherence to consequential factors of violation of principles of natural justice. This view gains support from the decision of Apex Court in S.L. Kapoor v. Jagmohan , AIR 1981 SC 136.

¶27

In the above circumstances, writ petition, being thoroughly devoid of merits, is accordingly dismissed.

¶28

( Dixit Krishna Shripad ) Judge

¶29

Madhusmita

¶30

Signature Not Verified

¶31

Digitally Signed Signed by: MADHUSMITA MALLICK Designation: Asst-Register-cum-Senior Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, C UTT ACK Date: 18-Sep-2025 18:47:02

¶32

Page 3 of 3

Chandi Prasad v. Addl.Dist.Magistrate

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandi Prasad v. Addl.Dist.Magistrate

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Litun Pradhan Vs State of Odisha

Asisa Kumar Mishra Vs State of Odisha

Mitali Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Banabihari Rath Vs State of Odisha

State of Orissa Vs Rabinarayan Panda

Manoj Patnaik Vs State of Odisha