Disposed¶22

Aratatrana Bhuyan v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC27 Jan 2026WP(C)/32835/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Odisha High Court PIL disposal on encroachment and eviction of Government land; Nuapada Mouza, Cuttack Sadar Tahasil; Plot No.525 (Gochar), Plot No.527 (Patia), Plot Nos.2029 and 1986 (Gramya Rasta); mandamus sought against State of Odisha; Tahasildar Sadar Cuttack; Collector-cum-District Magistrate Cuttack; representation dated 21.08.2025 Annexure-5 pending; earlier W.P.(C) No.29245 of 2011, order dated 09.12.2011; contempt petition dropped for non-prosecution; eviction cases initiated, posted 07.02.2026; writ petition disposed 27.01.2026; Harish Tandon, Chief Justice; M.S. Raman, Judge.

What did the court decide?

No writ of mandamus issued; the petition was disposed of with an observation expressing hope that the concerned authorities evict the encroachers and demolish unauthorized constructions in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.

Aratatrana Bhuyan Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether the Court should issue a writ of mandamus to the opposite parties to take steps to evict encroachers from the four Government land plots in Nuapada Mouza, Cuttack Sadar Tahasil (Plot Nos. 525, 527, 2029 and 1986). +1 more

¶13

Ratio / Principle

The Court decided it was not apposite to keep the matter pending, as the Government had activated the statutory process with a specified timeline to remove encroachments and evict encroachers of the Government lands.

¶21

Key takeaways

The Court expressed the hope that the authorities concerned shall proceed to evict the encroachers and demolish the unauthorized constructions in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.obiter¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

PIL (W.P.(C) No.32835 of 2025) by a villager of Nuapada, Cuttack Sadar Tahasil, seeking mandamus for eviction of encroachers from four Government plots in Nuapada Mouza (Plot No.525/Khata 668, Ac.0.09 dec., Kissam: Gochar; Plot No.527/Khata 660, Ac.0.15 dec., Kissam: Patia; Plot No.2029/Khata 667, Ac.1.30 dec., and Plot No.1986/Khata 667, Ac.0.10 dec., Kissam: Gramya Rasta). An earlier petition, W.P.(C) No.29245 of 2011, had yielded a direction (order dated 09.12.2011) to file a fresh representation before the Collector, Cuttack; subsequent representations (including one dated 21.08.2025, Annexure-5) went unconsidered and a contempt petition was dropped for non-prosecution. On instruction of the Tahasildar, Sadar, Cuttack, the State reported that eviction cases had been initiated and were posted for 07.02.2026. Finding it not apposite to keep the matter pending, the Bench (Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Justice M.S. Raman) disposed of the petition on 27.01.2026, hoping the authorities would evict the encroachers and demolish unauthorized constructions in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. No writ of mandamus was issued; no statute or precedent was cited.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.32835 of 2025 (PIL)

¶3

Aratatrana Bhuyan …. Petitioner

¶4

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Panigrahi, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Soubhagya Swain, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha and others

¶7

…. Opposite Parties Mr. Debashis Tripathy, AGA

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND

¶10

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

¶11

Order No.

¶12

ORDER 27.01.2026

¶13

1. The petitioner, claiming to be villager of Nuapada under Cuttack Sadar Tahasil in the district of Cuttack, filed the present writ petition in the nature of Public Interest Litigation beseeching indulgence of this Court to issue writ of mandamus to the opposite parties to take steps to evict the encroachers of Government land pertaining to Plot No.525, Khata No.668 having area Ac.0.09 decimal, Kissam: Gochar under Nuapada Mouza, Cuttack Sadar Tahail, District: Cuttack and Plot No.527, Khata No.660 having area Ac.0.15 decimal, Kissam: Patia under Nuapada Mouza, Cuttack Sadar Tahail, District: Cuttack and Plot No.2029, Khata No.667 having area Ac.01.30 decimal, Kissam: Gramya Rasta under Nuapada Mouza, Cuttack Sadar Tahail, District: Cuttack and Plot No.1986, Khata No.667 having area Ac.0.10 decimal, Kissam: Gramya Rasta under Nuapada Mouza, Cuttack Sadar Tahail, District: Cuttack.

¶14

Page 1 of 3

¶15

Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner along with other villagers made a representation dated 12^th July, 2011 to the Secretary, Revenue Department and Collector, Cuttack to take action against the encroachers of the Government land and also requested the Tahasildar, Cuttack and the Cuttack Development Authority, which has not been attended to. Therefore, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing writ petition bearing W.P.(C) No.29245 of 2011, which was disposed of vide order dated 9^th December, 2011 with direction to file fresh representation before the Collector, Cuttack and if such representation is filed, the Collector, Cuttack shall consider the same and disposed of the same within a period of six months from the date of receipt of that representation.

¶16

2.1. Pursuant to the same, the petitioner along with villagers filed fresh representation, which has not yet been considered. Challenging the same, the petitioner has filed contempt petition, which has also been dropped due to non-prosecution.

¶17

2.2. Thereafter, the petitioner has filed again representation dated 21^st August, 2025 vide Annexure-5 before the Collector- cum - District Magistrate, Cuttack for eviction of the encroachers from the Government land, which is still pending for consideration.

¶18

On an earlier occasion, when the matter was listed, learned Additional Government Advocate sought for adjournment to obtain instruction. Today, when the matter was taken up, on instruction, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State submitted that in respect of above Government land over which the encroachment is alleged, cases for eviction on such

¶19

Page 2 of 3

¶20

encroachment have been initiated and, the matter is posted on 7^th February, 2026 for further proceeding.

¶21

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and after going through the instructions as supplied to the learned Additional Government Advocate by the Tahasildar, Sadar, Cuttack, this Court does not feel it apposite to keep the matter pending as the Government has specified the timeline by activating the process of law to remove encroachments and evict encroachers of the Government lands by following procedure laid down in the relevant statute. This Court hopes that the authorities concerned shall proceed to evict the encroachers and demolish the unauthorized constructions in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.

¶22

5 . With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶23

(Harish Tandon) Chief Justice

¶24

(M.S. Raman) Judge

¶25

MRS/Laxmikant

¶26

Signature Not Verified

¶27

Digitally Signed Signed by: LAXMIKANT MOHAPATRA Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 28-Jan-2026 12:18:22

¶28

Page 3 of 3

Aratatrana Bhuyan v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aratatrana Bhuyan 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

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Hawkeye, Dhenkanal Vs Commissionr Cgst Central Revenue Building, Bbsr

M/S Montecarlo Limited, Gujarat Vs the Addl Commissioner of State Tax, (Appeal) Central Zone Ii, Cuttack

Kundus Kitchen Equipment Private Limited, Khordha Vs Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Bhubaneswar IV Circle, Khordha

Arakhita Swain Vs State of Odisha

Satish Kumar Biswal Vs State of Odisha

Ashutosh Mohanta Vs State of Odisha