Disposed¶17

Sura Jena v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC15 Apr 2026WP(C)/10901/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Orissa High Court, Cuttack; W.P.(C) No.10901 of 2023; Chittaranjan Dash, J.; order dated 15.04.2026; writ petition disposed of; shop allotment; change of ownership; shop No.31; pre-allotment transfer; affidavit; allotment by lottery; Aparti Srichandan; no statutory right demonstrated; consideration for vacant shop rooms per allotment guidelines; counsel S.P. Sarangi (petitioner), J. Khandayatray ASC (opposite parties).

What did the court decide?

In the absence of any statutory right demonstrated by the petitioner in his favour, and failure to show that the impugned order passed by the authority is not in accordance with law, the Court declined to entertain the application. ¶16

Sura Jena Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.10901 of 2023

¶3

Sura Jena

¶4

…. Petitioner Mr. S.P. Sarangi, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha & Others

¶7

…. Opp. Parties Mr. J. Khandayatray, ASC

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH

¶10

Order No.

¶11

ORDER 15.04.2026

¶12

1. By means of this application, the Petitioner seeks the following relief:-

¶13

“ It is, therefore, humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit the writ petition, issue rule nisi calling upon the opposite parties to show cause as to why the case of the petitioner shall not be consider for change of ownership of shop No.31 to him from the opposite party no.4, If the opposite parties fails to show cause or show insufficient show cause shown by the Opposite parties the said Rule be made absolute by directing the opposite party No.2 & 3 to transfer the ownership of shop room No.31 from opposite party No.4 in favour of the petitioner.”

¶14

In course of the hearing in the application, learned counsel for the Petitioner drew the attention of this Court to the fact that the Petitioner had made an application before the authority for change of ownership of shop No.31 on pre-allotment transfer on the basis of an affidavit. However, the authority declined to consider the application of the Petitioner on the ground that the shop room in question has already been allotted on the basis of a lottery drawn in presence of the applicants interested for the

¶15

occupation of the shop rooms. The Petitioner neither presented himself for the lottery nor made any application before the allotment was made. The matter relates to the year 2020, when the concerned shop room was allotted in favour of one Aparti Srichandan; now we are in 2026.

¶16

In view of the above, in absence of any statutory right demonstrated by the Petitioner in his favour or otherwise to show that the impugned order passed by the authority is not in accordance with law, this Court is not inclined to indulge in the application. However, it is observed that, in case, any shop room would be lying vacant for allotment, the application of the Petitioner may be considered in accordance with law or the guidelines for allotment by the authority concerned.

¶17

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶18

(Chittaranjan Dash)

Judge

Sarbani

Page 2 of 2

Signature Not Verified

¶23

Digitally Signed Signed by: SARBANI DASH Designation: Junior StenographerReason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 16-Apr-2026 16:29:45

Sura Jena v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sura Jena v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mamata Parida Vs Md,Central Warehous

Gobinda Moharana Vs Mahindra Gujarat Tractors Ltd., Ahmadabad

Somyakanta Thatoi Vs Collector, Jajpur

P. Ganesh Kumar Vs the Addl. Commissioner, Settlement and Consolidation, Sambalpur

Gopabandhu Behera Vs Commissioner Consolidation, Odisha

M/S Pgs Construction, Grand Road, Puri Vs the Real Estate, Appellate Tribunal, Bbsr