Disposed¶26

Sanjaya Kumar Sahu v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC16 Sept 2025WP(C)/23238/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Withdrawal of writ petition with liberty to file afresh — absence of particulars of acquired land and of the provision of law under which acquisition was made — entitlement under Odisha Resettlement and Rehabilitation Policy, 2006 not clarified — benefits as extended to other co-sharers sought from Opposite Party No.4 — High Court of Orissa at Cuttack — Coram: Justice K.R. Mohapatra, Justice Savitri Ratho — Order dated 16.09.2025.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh writ petition with better particulars within a period of one month; writ petition disposed of as withdrawn. ¶26

Sanjaya Kumar Sahu Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.23238 OF 2025

¶3

Sanjaya Kumar Sahu

¶4

…. Petitioner

¶5

Mr. Santosh Kumar Dash, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

State of Odisha and Others

¶8

…. Opp. Parties

¶9

Mr. Swayambhu Mishra, Additional Standing Counsel

¶10

CORAM: JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO

Order No.

ORDER 16.09.2025

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶15

2 . The Petitioner has filed this writ application with the

¶16

following prayers:-

¶17

“It is therefore prayed that, this Hon’ble Court may gracious enough to consider facts stated in the petition and may further be pleased to admit this writ application, issue a rule calling upon opposite parties to show cause as to why

¶18

(i) this writ application shall not be allowed, (ii) Op No.4 shall not be directed to extend benefits under Rehabilitation and resettlement policy, 2006 to these petitioners as extended to other co-sharers within such period as stipulated by this Hon’ble Court

¶19

If Op parties failed to show cause or shows insufficient case, the said rule may be made absolute.

¶20

And may pass such other order/orders, direction/s writ or writs as this Hon’ble court deem fit and proper considering facts and circumstance of the case.

¶21

And for such act of kindness these petitioners shall ever pray.”

¶22

Page 1 of 2

¶23

The details of the land stated to have been acquired has not been stated in the pleadings of the writ petition. It is also not stated under which provisions of law, the land has been acquired. It is also further not clear as to how the Petitioner is entitled to get the benefit under the Odisha Resettlement and Rehabilitation Policy, 2006.

¶24

Mr. Dash, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the relevant information have not been provided in the writ petition. Hence, he makes a prayer to withdraw the writ petition seeking liberty to file a fresh one with better particulars.

¶25

4.1. A Memo filed in Court by Mr. Dash, learned counsel for the Petitioner in support of his submission is taken on record.

¶26

In view of the Memo filed, the writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn with liberty to the Petitioner to file a fresh writ petition with better particulars within a period of one month hence.

¶27

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

¶28

(K.R. Mohapatra) Judge

¶29

Himansu

¶30

(Savitri Ratho) Judge

¶31

Signature Not Verified

¶32

Digitally Signed Signed by: HIMANSU SEKHAR DASH Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 19-Sep-2025 13:48:03

¶33

Page 2 of 2

Sanjaya Kumar Sahu v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjaya Kumar Sahu v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gouranga Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Subash Chandra Ghatuary Vs State of Odisha

Braja Kishor Prdhan Vs the Arbitrator Under Nh ACT,1956-CUM-DISTRICT Magistrate and Collector,Sambalpur

Radharaman Sarangi Vs Indian Oil Corpn.

Parbati Jena Vs the Arbitrator Under Nh Act, 1956 -Cum-District Magistrate and Collector, Sambalpur

Padmanava Dhall Vs State of Odisha