Disposed¶23

Abhi Behera v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC11 Nov 2025WP(C)/26657/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Orissa High Court writ petition disposed with administrative direction; community centre site selection, Serial No.1566, Nilagiri Block, Balasore; plot No.1381 kisam 'Nadi area'; R.I. report Annexure-3; representation Annexure-5; Collector, Balasore impleaded as opposite party No.3; examination and decision as per law within four weeks; personal hearing for petitioner representative; no adjudication on merits; no statute or precedent cited.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of: Collector, Balasore impleaded as opposite party No.3 and directed to examine the petitioners' grievance (Annexure-3) and take a decision as per law, preferably within four weeks of receipt of the order, allowing a petitioner representative to attend any personal hearing; urgent certified copy to issue as per rules. ¶23

Abhi Behera Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether the project list entry (Serial No.1566, Nilagiri Block) issued by the District Planning and Monitoring Unit, earmarking the site for a new Community Centre at Sitapatipur Siadimal G.P., allegedly over plot No.1381 recorded with kisam 'Nadi area', should be quashed. +1 more

¶14

Court's answer

The Court expresses nothing on the merits of the petitioners' claim referring to Annexure-3 (the R.I. report); the merits are left to the decision of opposite party No.3.

¶21

Ratio / Principle

The Collector, Balasore, who had not been impleaded as a party, is directed to be impleaded as opposite party No.3.

¶19

Key takeaways

Recording the submissions of learned counsel for the respective parties, the Court directs opposite party No.3 to examine the petitioners' grievance and to take a decision accordingly and as per law.ratio¶21
The writ petition stands disposed of with the said direction, to be complied with by opposite party No.3 at the earliest preferably within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.ratio¶23
If personal hearing is necessary while complying with the direction, opposite party No.3 shall allow one of the representatives of the petitioners to attend the proceeding.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, W.P.(C) No.26657 of 2025 (Abhi Behera & others v. State of Odisha & others), order dated 11.11.2025 by R.K. Pattanaik, J. Petitioners sought quashing of a project-list entry (Serial No.1566, Nilagiri Block) issued by the District Planning and Monitoring Unit under the Collector, Balasore, earmarking the site for a new Community Centre at Sitapatipur Siadimal G.P., contending per the R.I. report (Annexure-3) that construction was planned over plot No.1381 recorded with kisam 'Nadi area'; their grievance was pending before the Collector, who had not been impleaded. The Court directed impleadment of the Collector as opposite party No.3 and, recording submissions but without expressing anything on the merits, disposed of the petition directing opposite party No.3 to examine the grievance and take a decision as per law, preferably within four weeks of receipt of the order, permitting one petitioner representative to attend any personal hearing.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.26657 of 2025

¶3

Abhi Behera & others

¶4

…. Petitioners

¶5

Mr. S.B. Mohanty, Advocate

¶6

-Versus-

¶7

State of Odisha & others

¶8

…. Opposite Parties Mr. S. Swain, AGA

¶9

CORAM: MR. JUSTICER.K. PATTANAIK

ORDER

Order No.

11.11.2025

1. Heard Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Swain, learned AGA for the State.

¶14

Instant writ petition is filed by the petitioners to quash the project list in respect of Serial No.1566 vis-à-vis Nilagiri Block issued by the District Planning and Monitoring Unit under the jurisdiction of the Collector, Balasore with regard to construction of a new Community Centre at Sitapatipur Siadimal G.P. under Nilagiri Block of the district earmarked as the selection site on the grounds stated.

¶15

Referring to the R.I. report i.e. Annexure-3, Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the alleged construction is decided to be taken up over plot No.1381 which is recorded with kisam ‘Nadi area’ as mentioned therein, hence, the grievance of the petitioners

¶16

Page 1 of 3

¶17

which is pending decision before the Collector, Balasore and therefore, a direction may perhaps be issued in that regard.

¶18

Recorded the objection of Mr. Swain, learned AGA for the State.

¶19

The Collector, Balasore has not been impleaded as a party herein, which is accordingly directed, considering the submission of Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶20

Office to carry out the above order impleading the Collector, Balasore as opposite party No.3.

¶21

Having allowed the impletion of the Collector, Balasore and since, such representation is addressed to him, a copy of which is at Annexure-5, recording the submissions of learned counsel for the respective parties and without expressing anything on the merits with respect to the claim of the petitioners referring to Annexure-3, the Court is inclined to direct opposite party No.3 to examine such grievance and to take a decision accordingly and as per law.

¶22

Hence, it is ordered.

¶23

In the result, the writ petition stands disposed of with the direction as aforesaid to be complied with by opposite party No.3 at the earliest preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. It is further directed that in case, personal hearing is necessary,

¶24

Page 2 of 3

¶25

opposite party No.3 shall allow one of the representatives of the petitioners to attend the proceeding, while complying the direction as above.

¶26