Dismissed¶9

Kali Charan Senapati v. Commnr. of Endowment

Orissa HC19 Feb 2026WP(C)/6995/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Eviction from debottar/deity land; Odisha Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1951 S.25; O.A. No.89 of 2016; unauthorised occupation; refusal of rent by Sub-Collector-cum-Trustee; Baripada Debottar; arrear dues Rs.65,100/-; lease agreement on market rent; dismissal of W.P.(C) for non-deposit of dues despite time; eviction liberty to Opposite Party No.3; interim order vacated; Mayurbhanj; Notice No.448/Rev.(BC); Annexure-4.

What did the court decide?

No relief to the Petitioner; writ petition dismissed, Opposite Party No.3 given liberty to evict the Petitioner pursuant to the impugned notice (Annexure-4), and the interim order dated 05.04.2022 in I.A. No.3506 of 2022 vacated. ¶9

Kali Charan Senapati Vs Commnr. of Endowment — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.6995 of 2022

¶3

Kali Charan Senapati …. Petitioner

¶4

Mr. Samir Kumar Mishra, Sr. Advocate Being assisted by Mr. S. Mohanty, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

Commissioner of Endowments & others

¶7

…. Opp. Parties

¶8

Mr. Amit Kumar Nath, Advocate (for Commissioner of Endowments) Mr. Bibekananda Nayak, Additional Government Advocate

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA

¶11

JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

¶12

Order No.

¶13

ORDER 19.02.2026

¶14

1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶15

Petitioner in this writ petition seeks to assail the Notice No.448/Rev. (BC) dated 21.02.2022 (Annexure-4) asking the Petitioner to vacate the land under his occupation pertaining to Plot No.1575 under Khata No.381/1 in Mauza-SukhilaharSamil-Mahulia, measuring an area of Ac.0.01 dec. (420 sqr. ft.) (kisam Gharabari) in the district of Mayurbhanj (for brevity the case land).

¶16

It is the case of the Petitioner that the case land is being occupied by the Petitioner for more than 30 years. Till 2016, the Petitioner was paying rent in respect of the case land, but thereafter the Sub-Collector, Baripada-cum-Trustee,

¶17

Shri Shri Raghunath Jew Bije, Baripada (for brevity, the deity) refused to accept rent in respect of the case land. A proceeding under Section 25 of the Odisha Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1951 in O.A. No.89 of 2016 was initiated against the Petitioner for unauthorised occupation of the case land, which is the deity’s property.

¶18

3.1. O.A. No.89 of 2016 was disposed of vide order dated 30.11.2019, directing the Petitioner to vacate the case land. The said order was not within the knowledge of the Petitioner.

¶19

3.2. Accordingly, the impugned notice was issued by the order of the Collector, Mayurbhanj asking the Petitioner to vacate the case land.

¶20

When the matter was under consideration, this Court vide order dated 14.08.2025, directed the Additional Assistant Commissioner of Endowments, Cuttack to make an enquiry and submit a report with regard to the nature of occupation of the Petitioner over the case land and as to whether there is any difficulty in allowing the Petitioner to occupy the land on any terms and conditions, which would not be prejudicial to the deity’s interest.

¶21

4.1. Accordingly, the report was submitted by the Additional Assistant Commissioner of Endowments, Cuttack, which was taken into consideration on 10.09.2025. In his report, the Additional Assistant Commissioner stated that there is no difficulty in allowing the Petitioner to occupy the case land, if he clears all his pending dues and executes an agreement of lease for the case land and goes on paying the

¶22

Page 2 of 4

¶23

rent regularly at the present market rate, following the terms and conditions to be fixed by the Temple Administration/ Executive Officer, Baripada Debottar in the interest of the deity.

¶24

Accordingly, this Court directed the learned Counsel for the Commissioner of Endowments to take instruction with regard to arrears, to be paid by the Petitioner for execution of agreement.

¶25

The matter was then taken up on 01.12.2025 and Mr. Nath, learned Counsel for the Commissioner of Endowments submitted that the arrear dues of the Petitioner up to August, 2025 was calculated at Rs.65,100/-. A copy of the calculation sheet was submitted to this Court along with Letter No.1159 dated 18.09.2025 of Sub-Collector-cum-Executive Officer, Baripada Debottar. A copy of the said letter was also served on learned Counsel for the Petitioner, who prayed for a short adjournment to clear up the pending dues for occupation of the case land. The matter was then adjourned to 29.01.2026, on which date, an adjournment was sought for to clear up the dues. While granting such adjournment, this Court made it clear that no further prayer for extension of time to deposit the outstanding dues shall be entertained in future. Today, Mr. Mishra, learned Senior Advocate prays for further adjournment to clear up the pending dues.

¶26

In view of the order dated 29.01.2026; this Court is not inclined to entertain the prayer made by Mr. Mishra, learned Sr. Advocate appearing for the Petitioner.

¶27

Page 3 of 4

¶28

Since the Petitioner failed to clear up the dues up to August, 2025 within the time as directed by this Court, this Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition.

¶29

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.

¶30

The Opposite Party No.3 is at liberty to evict the Petitioner from the case land pursuant to the impugned notice under Annexure-4.

¶31

Interim order dated 05.04.2022 passed in I.A. No.3506 of 2022 stands vacated.

¶32

(K.R. Mohapatra) Judge

(S.K. Mishra)

Judge

Prasant

Signature Not Verified

¶37

Digitally Signed Signed by: PRASANT KUMAR PRADHAN Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 20-Feb-2026 14:08:16

¶38

Page 4 of 4

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Notice No.448/Rev. (BC) dated 21.02.2022 (Annexure-4) asking the Petitioner to vacate Plot No.1575 under Khata No.381/1 in Mauza-Sukhilahar Samil-Mahulia (Ac.0.01 dec., kisam Gharabari), district Mayurbhanj, issued by the order of the Collector, Mayurbhanj.¶2
Collector, Mayurbhanj · 21.02.2022
Prior proceeding
Petitioner occupied the case land for more than 30 years and paid rent until 2016; thereafter the Sub-Collector, Baripada-cum-Trustee of the deity (Shri Shri Raghunath Jew Bije, Baripada) refused to accept rent.¶3
Prior proceeding
Proceeding under Section 25 of the Odisha Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1951 in O.A. No.89 of 2016 initiated against the Petitioner for unauthorised occupation of the case land, the deity's property.¶3
Prior proceeding
O.A. No.89 of 2016 disposed of vide order dated 30.11.2019 directing the Petitioner to vacate the case land; the order was not within the Petitioner's knowledge.¶3.1
Prior proceeding
Vide order dated 14.08.2025 this Court directed the Additional Assistant Commissioner of Endowments, Cuttack to enquire into the nature of the Petitioner's occupation and whether he could be allowed to occupy the land on terms not prejudicial to the deity.¶4
Prior proceeding
Report submitted and considered on 10.09.2025: no difficulty in allowing occupation if pending dues cleared, lease agreement executed and market-rate rent paid regularly on terms fixed by the Temple Administration/Executive Officer, Baripada Debottar.¶4.1
Prior proceeding
On 01.12.2025 arrear dues up to August, 2025 reported as Rs.65,100/- (calculation sheet with Letter No.1159 dated 18.09.2025 of Sub-Collector-cum-Executive Officer, Baripada Debottar); matter adjourned to 29.01.2026 with a further adjournment granted, the Court clarifying no further extension of time would be entertained.¶6
Prior proceeding
Interim order dated 05.04.2022 passed in I.A. No.3506 of 2022 stood during the pendency of the writ petition; later vacated by this order.¶11

Kali Charan Senapati v. Commnr. of Endowment

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kali Charan Senapati v. Commnr. of Endowment

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rabinarayan Mishra Vs State of Odisha

Rajan Khan Vs Jitendra Prasad Singh,Presiding Officer,Debts Recovery Tribunal,Cda,Cuttack

Sri Raghunath Jew Chandan Trust, Baisinga, Mayurbhanj Vs State of Odisha

Ratikanta Samantaray Vs State of Odisha

Pushpa Kumari Vs Presiding Officer, Labourcourt, Sambalpur

Janmajaya Rohidas Vs State of Odisha