Disposed¶22

Biswajit Nayak v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC27 Jul 2026WP(C)/8858/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Orissa High Court, Cuttack; W.P.(C) No.8858 of 2026; Biswajit Nayak v. State of Odisha & Ors.; decided 27.07.2026 by Dr. Justice Sanjeeb K Panigrahi; Tahasildar Tangi; Encroachment Case No.1260/95-96; Form-Ka / Form 'K' notice dated 02.01.1995 set aside; Section 6 of the O.P.L E Act; fresh Form-Ka within two weeks; no coercive action; land settlement; Sabik R.O.R 1952; mouza Mangala Jodi; Khata No.332; Plot Nos.406 and 406/900; late Basudev Nayak; late Manguli Nayak; Labani Bewa; Tahasildar Banapur notice 09.09.1969; deposit; R.O.R; disposed without merits.

What did the court decide?

Form-Ka notice dated 02.01.1995 set aside; Tahasildar, Tangi directed to issue fresh Form-Ka to the Petitioner within two weeks; no coercive action against the Petitioner on the basis of the earlier Form-Ka in the meantime. ¶22

Biswajit Nayak Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether the Form-Ka notice dated 02.01.1995 issued by the Tahasildar, Tangi in Encroachment Case No.1260/95-96 ought to be set aside and a fresh Form-Ka issued, in light of the petitioner's plea of possession since 1952 and prior deposit towards settlement of the land.

¶12

Court's answer

Since the challenged Form-Ka pertains to the year 1995, the notice under Form-Ka dated 02.01.1995 issued by the Tahasildar, Tangi is set aside, and the Tahasildar is directed to issue a fresh Form-Ka to the Petitioner within two weeks.

¶20

Ratio / Principle

In the meantime, no coercive action shall be taken against the Petitioner on the basis of the earlier Form-Ka.

¶21

Key takeaways

The directions were issued without going into the merits of the case; the merits of the petitioner's settlement claim were not adjudicated.ratio¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition disposed of by a Single Judge (Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi) without going into the merits: the Form-Ka notice dated 02.01.1995 issued by the Tahasildar, Tangi in Encroachment Case No.1260/95-96 (threatening action under Section 6 of the O.P.L E Act) was set aside on the ground that it pertained to the year 1995; the Tahasildar was directed to issue a fresh Form-Ka to the Petitioner within two weeks, and no coercive action was to be taken against the Petitioner on the basis of the earlier Form-Ka in the meantime. The Petitioner had claimed possession of Khata No.332, Plot Nos.406 and 406/900, mouza Mangala Jodi, Tahasil Tangi since 1952, publication of the Sabik R.O.R in 1952 in the name of his grandfather late Manguli Nayak, and a 1969 deposit pursuant to a Tahasildar, Banapur notice, following which R.O.R issued in his father's favour but the land was never settled.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.8858 of 2026

¶3

Biswajit Nayak ...… Petitioner(s) Mr. Atmajit Manmith Das, Advoate

¶4

-Versus-

¶5

……. State of Odisha & Ors. Opposite Party (s) Mr. Rajdeep Pradhan, ASC

¶6

CORAM:

¶7

DR. JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI ORDER

Order No.

27.07.2026

1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.

¶12

2. The Petitioner, by filing this Writ Petition, has sought for a direction from this Court to the Tahasildar, Tangi/Opposite Party No.3 to settle the land in his favour disposing the encroachment Case No.1260/-95-96.

¶13

3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that his father, named, late Basudev Nayak was in possession over the property under mouza-Mangala Jodi Tahasil-Tangi Khata No-332 Plot No406 and 406/900 since 1952. Accordingly, Sabik R.O.R was published in the year of 1952 and the land was recorded in the

¶14

Signature Not Verified

¶15

Digitally Signed Signed by: GITANJALI NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 29-Jul-2026 12:53:07

¶16

name of Grand Father of the petitioner, namely, late Manguli Nayak till today. The Opposite Party No.3/Tahasildar, Tangi initiated an Encroachment Case against late grand mother of the petitioner, namely, Labani Bewa bearing Encroachment Case No. 1260/95-96. The Opposite Party No.3/Tahasildar, Tangi issued a Form 'K' directing to appear before the Tahasildar to file show cause otherwise the Opposite Party No.3/Tahasildar, Tangi would take action under Section 6 of the O.P.L.E Act. On 09.09.1969 the Tahasildar Banapur also issued notice to late father of the petitioner to deposit the required amount and, accordingly, Tahasildar Banapur issued R.O.R in favour of the father of the petitioner. Pursuant to such notice, the father of the petitioner deposited the said amount. But, the said land was not settled in his name. The petitioner is residing over the land generation after generation and is in possession over the property more than 80 years. Hence, the action of the Tahasilar, Tangi regarding nonsettlement of the land in his favour is illegal. Hence, this case.

¶17

4. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the Petitioner and on going through the averments made in this Writ Petition, without going into the merits of the case, since the Form-Ka, which the Petitioner has challenged before this Court is

¶18

Signature Not Verified

¶19

Digitally Signed Signed by: GITANJALI NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 29-Jul-2026 12:53:07

¶20

pertaining to the year 1995, the Opposite Party No.3/ Tahasilar, Tangi is directed to issue fresh Form-Ka to the Petitioner within a period of two weeks from today. Accordingly, the notice under Form-Ka dated 02.01.1995 issued by the Opposite Party No.3/ Tahasilar, Tang is set aside.

¶21

5. In the meantime, no coercive action shall be taken against the Petitioner on the basis of aforesaid Form-Ka issued earlier.

¶22

6. The Writ Petition stands disposed of, accordingly.

¶23

( Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi) Judge

¶24

Gitanjali

¶25

Signature Not Verified

¶26

Digitally Signed Signed by: GITANJALI NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 29-Jul-2026 12:53:07

Biswajit Nayak v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Biswajit Nayak 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sudhansu Digal Vs State of Odisha

Sridhar Sabar Vs State of Odisha

Tikenani Kumbhar Vs State of Odisha

Rabi Mahakhud Vs State of Odisha

Pandaba Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Akrura Das Vs State of Odisha