Disposed¶18

Ishwar Chandra Pradhan @ Iswar Pradhan v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC3 Apr 2025WP(C)/6334/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Alternative remedy / statutory appeal doctrine; Section 12(1) O.P.L.E. Act; eviction notice Annexure-4; Tahasildar Sambalpur; encroachment; writ petition not entertained; liberty to appeal with condonation of delay and interim protection within 15 working days; appellate hearing to conclude within three months; no coercive action interim direction; High Court of Orissa; W.P.(C) 6334/2025; disposed 03.04.2025.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition disposed of: Petitioner permitted to file appeal under Section 12(1) of the O.P.L.E. Act with condonation-of-delay and interim-protection petitions within 15 working days; Appellate Authority to conclude hearing within three months; no coercive action pursuant to Annexure-4 until the interim application is taken up. ¶18

Ishwar Chandra Pradhan @ Iswar Pradhan Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶18

Issue for consideration

Whether the Writ Petition challenging the eviction notice under Annexure-4 issued by the Tahasildar, Sambalpur should be entertained by this Court notwithstanding the availability of a statutory remedy of appeal under Section 12(1) of the O.P.L.E. Act.

¶14

Court's answer

The Court declined to entertain the prayer made in the Writ Petition in view of the clear statutory remedy of appeal under Section 12(1) of the O.P.L.E. Act against the impugned order (Annexure-4).

¶16

Ratio / Principle

Considering the request of the Petitioner's counsel, the Court permitted the Petitioner to file an appeal before the concerned Appellate Authority under Section 12(1) of the O.P.L.E. Act, along with a petition for condonation of delay (if any) and a petition for interim protection.

¶16

Key takeaways

The appeal was to be filed within 15 working days, and the Appellate Authority was directed to conclude the hearing within three months from the date of filing of the appeal.ratio¶16
Till the interim application to be filed by the Petitioner is taken up, no coercive action shall be taken against the Petitioner pursuant to the impugned order under Annexure-4 issued by the Opposite Party No.4/Tahasildar, Sambalpur.ratio¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (W.P.(C) No.6334 of 2025, High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, Dr. Justice S.K. Panigrahi, decided 03.04.2025) filed by an encroacher challenging an eviction notice under Annexure-4 issued by the Tahasildar, Sambalpur (Opposite Party No.4), disposed of on the ground of an available statutory remedy: the Court, noting the State counsel's submission that an appeal lies under Section 12(1) of the O.P.L.E. Act against the impugned order, declined to entertain the writ prayer but permitted the Petitioner to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority within 15 working days, together with a petition for condonation of delay (if any) and a petition for interim protection, directed the Appellate Authority to conclude the hearing within three months of filing, and ordered that no coercive action pursuant to the Annexure-4 notice be taken until the interim application is taken up.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.6334 of 2025

¶2

Ishwar Chandra ..... Petitioners Pradhan@Iswar Pradhan Mr. Suryakanta Dwibedi, Advocate & Anr. -versus- ..... State of Odisha & Ors. Opposite Parties Mr. Sanjay Rath, AGA

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S. K. PANIGRAHI

Order

ORDER

03.04.2025

No.

03.

1 . This matter is taken up through hybrid

¶11

arrangement.

¶12

2. Heard.

¶13

3. In filing this Writ Petition, the Petitioner being an encroacher, has challenged the order of eviction notice under Annexure-4 issued by the Opposite Party No.4/Tahasildar, Sambalpur.

¶14

4. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the State submits that there is a clear statutory remedy of appeal available under Section 12(1) of the O.P.L.E. Act against the impugned order under Annexure-4. Hence, the Petitioner should approach the concerned Appellate Authority.

¶15

Page 1 of 2.

¶16

5. In such view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to entertain the prayer made in this Writ Petition. However, considering the request of the learned counsel for the Petitioner, this Court permits the Petitioner to file an appeal along with a petition for condonation of delay, if any, so also a petition for interim protection before the concerned Appellate Authority as per Section 12(1) of the O.P.L.E. Act, within a period of 15 working days hence. In such event, Appellate Authority shall conclude the hearing within a period of three months from the date of filing of the appeal.

¶17

6. It is further directed that till the interim application to be filed by the Petitioner is taken up, no coercive action shall be taken against the Petitioner pursuant to the impugned order under Annexure-4, issued by the Opposite Party No.4/Tahasildar, Sambalpur.

¶18

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

¶19

(Dr. S.K. Panigrahi) Judge

¶20

Signature Not Verified

¶21

Digitally Signed Signed by: GITANJALI NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Gitanjali Date: 03-Apr-2025 16:16:41

¶22

Page 2 of 2.

Ishwar Chandra Pradhan @ Iswar Pradhan v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ishwar Chandra Pradhan @ Iswar Pradhan 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

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Minakshi Nanda Vs State of Odisha

Rupa Khatua Vs Sumanta Kishore Roy

Niranjan Murmu Vs State of Odisha

Mahatma Gandhi Smrutisadan, Jharsuguda Vs M/S Vedanta Ltd., Mumbai

Sai Multi Speciality Hospital Pvt. Ltd., Bargarh Vs Directorate of Fire and Emergency Service, Home Guards and Civil Defence, Odisha,Cuttack

Ajaya Rath Vs State of Odisha