Writ petition challenging a 1993 Sub-Collector, Angul order in a land-settlement/encroachment matter dismissed at threshold: the OPLE Act provides a revision remedy before the Collector under Section 12(2), and filing after 33 years constituted inordinate delay and laches barring exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.10372 of 2026
Anil Kumar Mahakuda @ Mahakhuda
…. Petitioner
Mr. A.K. Panigrahi, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha & Others
…. Opp. Parties Mr. S.K. Jee, AGA
CORAM:
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH
ORDER
Order No.
01.05.2026
following relief:-
“It is therefore, humbly prayed that this Honhle Court may graciously be pleased to:
I Issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 28.08.1993 passed by the Opp. Party No.3 in Appeal Case No.30/1990 under Annexure-2.
II Declare that mere classification of land as "Jungle Kissam" does not bar settlement under the OPLE Act unless notified asforest land.
III Restore the order of settlement passed by the Opp. Party No.4 in Encroachment Case No. 105/86-87.
IV. And further be pleased to pass any other order/orders as deemed fit and proper to give complete relief to the petitioner.
And for this act of kindness the petitioner shall, as in duty bound, ever pray.”
challenging the order dated 28.08.1993 passed by the SubCollector, Angul.
“ 12(2) The Collector may revise a decision or order made by a Subdivisional Officer under Sub-Sec. (1) ”
(Chittaranjan Dash)
Judge
Sipra
Signature Not Verified
Page 2 of 2
Digitally Signed Signed by: SIPRA MUDULI Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Oris sa, C uttack Date: 02-May-2026 15:52:33
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging the 1993 Sub-Collector order should be entertained when Section 12(2) OPLE Act provides a revision remedy before the Collector and the petition was filed after a
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Anil Kumar Mahakuda @ Mahakhuda
State of Odisha & Others
Chittaranjan Dash
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
