Dismissed

Ashok Samal v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC22 Sept 2025WP(C)/13549/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenging a notice claimed ownership of the disputed property. The State submitted the notice applied to a different plot. The Court held the writ petition premature and declined to entertain the prayer, though petitioners were permitted to approach the authority when the cause of action arises.

What did the court decide?

Petition declined; Petitioners permitted to approach competent authority when cause of action arises.

Ashok Samal Vs State of Odisha — Land Acquisition | Orissa HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.13549 of 2025

¶3

Ashok Samal & Ors.

¶4

…. Petitioner(s)

¶5

Mr. Pramoda Kumar Mishra, Adv.

¶6

-versus-

¶7

…. State of Odisha & Ors. Opposite Party (s) Smt. Sarita Moharana, ASC

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI

ORDER

Order

22.09.2025

No.

1 . This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.

¶16

2. In filing this Writ Petition, the Petitioners claiming themselves to be the owner of the disputed property in question have sought for a direction from this Court to the Tahasildar, Kishannagar/ Opposite Party No.3 for considering their reply to the show cause/ representation dated 04.03.2025 in connection with the letter No.1690 dated 06.05.2025 vide Annexure-1.

¶17

3. Heard.

¶18

4. Pursuant to the earlier order of this Court, learned counsel for the State, on instruction, submits that the impugned notice has been issued with respect to a different plot which is not occupied by the present Petitioners. Hence, the prayer of the Petitioners has rendered infructuous.

¶19

5. Considering the above submission made by the learned counsel for the State and since the impugned notice has not

¶20

Signature Not Verified

¶21

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 23-Sep-2025 19:52:11

¶22

Page 1 of 2

¶23

been issued with respect to the plot occupied by the Petitioners, this Court is of the view that the prayer made in this Writ Petitioner is premature. This Court, therefore, declines to entertain the prayer made in this Writ Petition. However, considering the request of learned counsel for the Petitioners, this Court permits the Petitioners to approach the competent authority as and when the cause of action will arise.

¶24

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

¶25

(Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi)

¶26

Judge

¶27

Ayaskanta

¶28

Signature Not Verified

¶29

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 23-Sep-2025 19:52:11

¶30

Page 2 of 2

Ashok Samal v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Samal v. 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

M/S Central Electronics Ltd. Vs M/S Surya International

Laxmidhar Mallik Vs Subhashree Abinash

Jaydeb Das @ Jayadeb Das @ Jayadev Das Vs State of Odisha

Chandra Sekhar Mohanty Vs State of Odisha

Rakesh Kumar Jena Vs the Branch Manager, Federal Bank, Brahmapur Branch, Ganjam

Suryakant Swain Vs State of Odisha