Birabara Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

“it is therefore, humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue writ of Mandamus by directing the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar (O.P. NO.4) to demarcate the land of the petitioner as per the application under annexure-2 series within a stipulated period and further direct the O.P. Nos.2 and 3 not to take possession or allot the land to anybody till the demarcation of the land of the petitioner and his family members by the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar are not completed.

¶16

And pass such other order(s)/direction(s) as this Hon’ble Court deem fit and proper. And for which act of your kindness the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.”

¶17

The limited grievance of the petitioner is that the demarcation case filed by him has not been disposed of as yet.

¶18

The Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar to conclude the Demarcation Application

¶19

Page 1 of 2

¶20

No.2026200200944 as early as possible, preferably within four weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order by the petitioner.

¶21

(Sashikanta Mishra)

¶22

Judge

¶23

Puspanjali

¶24

Signature Not Verified

¶25

Digitally Signed Signed by: PUSPANJALI GHADAI Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 11-Sep-2026 17:32:21

¶26

Page 2 of 2

Birabara Sahoo v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Birabara Sahoo v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases