Disposed

Manoranjan Moharana v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC3 Feb 2026WP(C)/515/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Public interest writ petition sought eviction of an alleged encroacher of Government land recorded as 'Rasta'. Authorities demarcated the plots and initiated three encroachment cases under the Odisha Prevention of Land Encroachment Act, so the Court directed completion of proceedings expeditiously and disposed of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed; authority directed to proceed per statute and conclude eviction proceedings at the earliest.

Manoranjan Moharana Vs State of Odisha — Land Acquisition | Orissa HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) PIL No.515 of 2026

¶2

Manoranjan Moharana and another …. Petitioners

¶3

Mr. Kali Prasad Mohanty, Advocate -versus-

¶4

State of Odisha and others

¶5

…. Opposite Parties

¶6

Mr. Debashis Tripathy, Addl. Government Advocate

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND

¶9

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

¶10

Order No.

¶11

ORDER 03.02.2026

¶12

1. The instant writ petition is at the behest of the petitioners with a prayer to direct the Tahasildar, Pipili to evict the opposite party No.6 who has allegedly encroached upon the Government land as the concerned villagers are facing difficulties to commute through the public road.

¶13

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the villagers including the petitioners made representation on 09.10.2025 to the Collector, Puri flagging illegal and unauthorized encroachment over Plot Nos.97, 107 and 108 under Khata No.146 which are recorded in the Record-of-Rights as “ Rasta ” causing inconvenience to them to commute to different destinations. Since no action has been taken by the Collector to evict the opposite party No.6 from the Government land, the instant writ petition is filed.

¶14

2.1. It is further stated that the petitioners have also made a representation on 09.10.2025 to the Secretary to Government

¶15

Page 1 of 3

¶16

of Odisha, Revenue Department regarding the indifference shown by the authority concerned by remaining silent over the issue and not taking any steps against the opposite party No.6 for removal of squatter. It is submitted that there is requirement to demarcate and evict the encroachment.

¶17

3. On the written instruction received from the Tahasildar, Pipili, it is submitted by Mr. Debashis Tripathy, learned Addl. Government Advocate that the Revenue Inspector, Pipili was instructed to initiate encroachment case against the encroacher(s). It is further submitted that in the meanwhile the Revenue Inspector, Pipili has demarcated the plots and three encroachment cases have already been initiated against the encroachers. As the eviction process has been initiated adhering to the provisions contained in Odisha Prevention of Land Encroachment Act, 1972, the relief(s) claimed by the writ petitioner has been granted.

¶18

4. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and taking note of the instructions as supplied to the learned Additional Government Advocate by the Tahasildar, Pipili, this Court does not feel it apposite to keep the matter pending as the Government has taken effective step by activating the process of law to evict the encroachers and remove the encroachments over the Government lands. It is, therefore, expected that by following due process of law and the procedure laid down in the relevant statute, the authority concerned shall proceed to evict the encroachers and demolish the unauthorized constructions/structures, if any, over the

¶19

Page 2 of 3

¶20

Government lands as expeditiously as possible. It is directed that the authority concerned shall bring the aforesaid proceeding to its logical end at the earliest.

¶21

5. In view of the above and since the grievance of the writ petitioners has already been attended to and/or redressed by the authority by initiating appropriate proceeding, this writ petition is disposed of.

¶22

(Harish Tandon) Chief Justice

¶23

(M.S. Raman) Judge

¶24

Bichi

¶25

Signature Not Verified

¶26

Digitally Signed Signed by: BICHITRANANDA SAHOO Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 04-Feb-2026 11:57:27

¶27

Page 3 of 3

Manoranjan Moharana v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoranjan Moharana 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

Ayush Sahu Vs State of Odisha

Pulak Nanda Vs Superintendent, Dhenkanal Range

M/S M. B. Associates, Kendujhar Vs Additional Commissioner of State Tax (Appeal), Cuttack

Sushil Kumar Dash Vs the Collector, Deogarh

M/S.Nayak Associates, Mahanadi Vihar, Cuttack Vs State of Odisha

Sukanta Kumar Nayak Vs State of Odisha