Disposed¶26

Bilanka Sahani v. State of Orissa

Orissa HC2 Sept 2025WP(C)/19789/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Shop room allotment; shopping complex near DRDA Office, Phulbani; advertisement under Annexure-2; parity with W.P.(C) No.15423 of 2012; interim order; auction of shop rooms; five vacant shop rooms; direction to opposite party No.2; six-week timeline; Bilanka Sahani v. State of Odisha; writ petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Direction to opposite party No.2 to consider and ensure allotment of a shop room to the petitioner inside the shopping complex or, if unavailable, in any nearby locality, upon receipt of the petitioner's application, preferably within six weeks of receipt of a copy of the order. ¶26

Bilanka Sahani Vs State of Orissa — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, claiming parity with the allotment allowed in W.P.(C) No.15423 of 2012, should be granted allotment of a shop room in the shopping complex near DRDA Office, Phulbani pursuant to the advertisement under Annexure-2.

¶17

Court's answer

The petitioner should be allowed to submit an application addressed to opposite party No.2 seeking allotment of a shop room, and upon receiving such application, opposite party No.2 shall consider the petitioner's case in respect of the five shop rooms stated to be lying vacant in the complex and, if not possible, for allotment outside the complex.

¶22

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition stands disposed of with the direction that, upon receiving the petitioner's application, opposite party No.2 shall deal with it and ensure allotment of a shop room in any of the localities including inside the premises of the complex, completing the exercise preferably within six weeks from receipt of a copy of the order.

¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

W.P. (C) No.19789 of 2017, High Court of Orissa at Cuttack (R.K. Pattanaik, J., order dated 02.09.2025): The petitioner, Bilanka Sahani, challenged the advertisement under Annexure-2 and sought a direction to opposite party No.2 to allot him a shop room in the shopping complex near DRDA Office, Phulbani, claiming parity with the allotment allowed in W.P.(C) No.15423 of 2012 (order dated 31 July 2017). Noting opposite party No.2's response that no shop room in the complex remained available and the petitioner's submission that, despite an interim order of this Court, the shop rooms had been put to auction, the Court disposed of the petition by permitting the petitioner to submit an application to opposite party No.2, which was directed to consider allotment of one of the five shop rooms stated to be lying vacant in the complex or, if not possible, allotment nearby, and to complete the exercise preferably within six weeks of receipt of a copy of the order.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P. (C) No.19789 of 2017

¶3

Bilanka Sahani

¶4

…. Petitioner

¶5

Mr. B.K. Mishra, Advocate

¶6

-Versus-

¶7

State of Odisha and others

¶8

…. Opposite Parties

¶9

Mr. P.K.Sahoo, ASC Mr. Biswajit Mohapatra, Advocate

¶10

CORAM:

¶11

MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK

ORDER

Order No.

02.09.2025

Heard Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Mohapatra, learned counsel for opposite party No.2 besides Mr. Sahoo, learned ASC for the State appearing for opposite party Nos. 1, 3 & 4.

¶17

Instant writ petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the advertisement under Annexure-2 and to direct opposite party No.2 to allot a shop room in his favour in the shopping complex near DRDA Office, Phulbani on the grounds stated therein.

¶18

In course of hearing, it is submitted by Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner that allotment has been allowed in a similarly situated case and while claiming so, he produced a copy of the order in W.P.(C) No.15423 of 2012 dated 31^st July,2017. Mr. Mohapatra, learned counsel for opposite party No.2 instead of referring to the counter affidavit submits that if the petitioner is seeking allotment in the

¶19

Page 1 of 3

¶20

complex, he shall have to make an application for a decision by opposite party No.2.

¶21

Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to furnish the security deposit for any such allotment and to file an application for a decision within a stipulated period.

¶22

Recording the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties and demand of parity in view of the order in W.P.(C) No.15423 of 2012, the Court is of the view that the petitioner should be allowed to submit an application addressed to opposite party No.2 seeking such allotment of a shop room inside the premises of the complex. This Court is also of the view that upon receiving such an application, opposite party No.2 shall consider the petitioner’s case in respect of five shop rooms stated to be lying vacant and if not possible, for any such allotment outside the complex. In fact, such a direction necessary, in view of the reply and response of Mr. Mohapatra, learned counsel for opposite party No.2 that no shop room is available in the complex and all have been allotted long back recording the submission of Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner that in spite of an interim order of this Court, the shop rooms of the complex were put to auction. Nevertheless, at this distinct point of time, in view of the above events having been taken place, the Court is inclined to direct opposite party No.2 to consider allotment of a shop room, in case available inside the premises of the complex as the claim is that five of the shop rooms are still available and ready for allotment and if

¶23

Page 2 of 3

¶24

not possible, to consider such allotment nearby upon receiving an application from the petitioner as such a course of action would serve the purpose and meet the ends of justice.

¶25

6. Accordingly, it is ordered.

¶26

In the result, the writ petition stands disposed of with the direction as aforesaid and upon receiving the application from the petitioner, opposite party No.2 shall deal with the same and to do the needful ensuring allotment of a shop room in any of the localities including inside the premises of the complex and to complete the above exercise as soon as possible preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶27

8. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per rules.

¶28

(R.K. Pattanaik) Judge

¶29

Balarm

¶30

Signature Not Verified

¶31

Page 3 of 3

¶32

Digitally Signed Signed by: BALARAM BEHERA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: OHC, CUTTACK Date: 03-Sep-2025 10:45:51

Bilanka Sahani v. State of Orissa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bilanka Sahani v. State of Orissa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prasant Kumar Harichandan Vs State of Odisha

Millan Kumar Tripathy Vs Minanayana Dash

Basanta Bagarty Vs State of Odisha

Gitanjali Behera Vs State of Odisha

Ajay Singh Vs State of Odisha

Kabita Hota Vs State of Odisha