National Green Tribunal
Shailesh Sahoo Convenor vs State Of Odisha Through Its Chief ... on 2 April, 2026
Item No.11 Court No. 2
BEFORE NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
Original Application No. 21/2024
1. Shailesh Sahoo, Convenor, Public Forum, Odisha,
Cuttack-753004
Applicant
Versus
1. State of Odisha through its Chief Secretary,
Government of Odisha,
General Administration Department,
Odisha Secretariat, Bhubaneswar- 751001
Email: [email protected]/[email protected]
2. Additional Chief Secretary, Forest, Environment
and Climate Change Department, Government of Odisha,
Kharavel Bhavan, Bhubaneswar, Odisha.
Email: [email protected]
3. Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department,
Government of Odisha,
Rajiv Bhawan, Keshari Nagar, Bhubaneswar- 751001.
Email: [email protected]
4. Vice Chairman, Cuttack Development Authority,
Arunodaya Bhawan, Link Road, Cuttack-12,
Email:[email protected]
5. Member Secretary, Odisha State Pollution Control Board,
A-118, Nilakanta Nagar, Unit-VIII, Bhubaneshwar- 751012.
Email: [email protected].
6. District Magistrate, Cuttack,
Collectorate, Cuttack-753002,
Email: [email protected]
7. The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Cuttack,
Choudhury Bazar, Nandi Sahi, Cuttack- 753001, Orissa
Email: [email protected]
Respondents
For the Applicant:
None for the applicant
For the Respondents:
O.A. No. 21/2024 Shailesh Sahoo Vs. State of Odisha & Ors.
2
Mr. Sanjay Rath, AGA for respondents no. 1 to 3 and 6 (through VC).
Mr. Dayananda Mohapatra Senior Advocate with Mr. Arya Dash,
Advocate for respondent no. 4 (through VC).
Mr. Manoranjan Paikaray, Advocate for Respondent No. 5 (through VC).
Mr. Biswajit Mohapatra Advocate for respondent no. 7 (through VC).
Coram:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. AFROZ AHMAD, EXPERT MEMBER
_____________________________________________________________________________
Order reserved on:-05.02.2026
Order pronounced on:-02.04.2026
________________________________________________________________________
ORDER
1. Mr. Shailesh Sahoo has sent by email the present letter petition (Pages no. 1-2 of the paper book) to this Tribunal, which has been treated and registered as Original Application (O.A.) No. 21/2024 for exercise of suo-moto jurisdiction in view of law laid down by Supreme Court in "Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai vs. Ankita Sinha & Ors." reported in 2021 SCC Online SC 897.
2. The applicant has raised grievances regarding illegal constructions raised in the catchment, corridors, barrage wall, boundary ball of river Mahanadi in the area of Naya Bazar of Cuttack City, Orissa in violation of environmental norms causing damage to ecology thereof. The relevant part of the letter petition treated as O.A. enumerating grievances of the applicant is reproduced as follows:-
X X X X "1. That the RIVER MAHANADI is the LIFE LINE of ODISHA & in Cuttack City it has ordained a Divine Importance & Significance like that of the HOLY GANGA in its whole Stretch.
2. That, the RIVER MAHANADI CATCHMENTS/Corridors, BARRAGE WALL, BOUNDARY WALLs are grossly OBSTRUCTED/ENCROACHED upon & ILLEGALLY CONSTRUCTED WITH Series of illegal constructions & boundaries after NAYA BAZAR areas under CHAULIAGANJ POLICE STATIONS & this has more provocatively violated by many Local People under CRRI Police O.A. No. 21/2024 Shailesh Sahoo Vs. State of Odisha & Ors.
3Statios under NAYA BAZAR BLOCK of Cuttack City under the Twin City Commissionerate Jurisdictions by series of local Persons who are taking advantage of the Govt Complacency and LACs of Corruptions/Bribes to the Local PS,to the Tahsildar,to the BDO,the SUB_REGISTRAR Office, Cuttack resulting which they are just enjoying over MAHANDI RIVER BED which will take an ugly TURN if not SAVED from now
3. That,the Situation in this STRETCH will turn into this Year's DELHI_PUNJAB_HIMACHAL & UTTARAKHAND FLOOD type situation unless until all illegal constructions & illegal VENDING/SELLING of MAHANADI RIVER LANDs are totally DECLARED AS NGT AREAS with a Direction that no RESIDENTIAL & Commercial activity is allowed in this stretch of MAHANDI because only due to series of Encroachments, illegal constructions on and over the RIVER BED, WATER BODIES & by making destruction of the WATER STREAMs the situations are getting ALARMING like that of DELHI_PUNJAB_HIMACHAL & UTTARAKHAND.
4. That, the COMMISSIONER CUTTACK MUNICIPAL CORPORATION(CUTTACK), CHAIRMAN (CUTTAK DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,CDA) are totally Deaf & Dumb over the issue as they are getting sizable income from those areas as the areas is little illiterate & village & Panchayat level areas; resulting which the GOVT AUTHORITIES are having hand in gloves with the LAND MAFIAs of the areas and they are also falsely implicating many local people of the areas by which the locals are also taking law into their own hands and are taking advantage of series of illegal constructions with the impression of getting lacs of income but the GOD FATHERs are the Kings who are Exploiting the poor locals/SC STs 7 Brahmins.
5. That, the the areas of KANHEIPUR,BHOGAMBA, BHADIMULA, CRRI,GATI ROUT PATNA, DIHA SAHI upto BIRIBATI under NAYA BAZAR BLOCK & under CRRI Police Stations of Cuttack District are grossly affected by this Illegal constructions/Encroachments and the Local MLA of BIJU JANTA DAL (BJD) Mr Souvik Biswal is also supporting People to encroach MAHANDI RIVERs and take LANDs into their own hands as they Wish because this is his Assembly Constituency under Cuttack-Choudwar MLA Seat.
PRAYER Therfore Mylord, this is sincerely requested that as the BJD Govt in Odisha and all the Govt officials are just run their Office on DAILY CORRUPTIONS & FALSE CASES, it is very difficult to get Justice in Open Courts, therefore We sincerely Wish yours estemmed offices to to take SUO_MOTTU cognizance of the issue on urgent basis & kindly made an ON SPOT VISIT by the NGT CENTRAL TEAM and issue Notices to the
1. BOGUS COMMISSIONER of CMC, Cuttack, 753001
2. The BOGUS COLLECTOR-cum-DM, Cuttack 753002
3. The Corrupt CDA Chairman, 753012
4. The BDO,NAYA BAZAR BLOCK, Cuttack 753004
5. The Corrupt SUB_REGISTRAR, Cuttack-753002 to give a FACT FINDING REPORT within 7 days apart from the NGT's OWN REPORT.
Sir, The majority of the People of the above mentioned areas will be greatly obliged and will get a shy of relief if NGT BANs all sorts of O.A. No. 21/2024 Shailesh Sahoo Vs. State of Odisha & Ors.
4illegal constructions in the MAHANADI RIVER BED_BOUNDARY Areas and by TERMINATING some of the TOP Officials out of these Departments & Offices, which will give a good precedent that People of Cuttack's KANHEIPUR_NAYABAZAR_CRRI_BHADIMULA etc got a respite from TENSIONs and with the INTERVENTION of NGT,the MAHANADI got SAVED from EROSION/MIS_UTILISATION & POLLUTION as the level of Corruption & MUSCLE POWER has increased to such extent in Odisha that it is very difficult to say any thing against the Ruling BJD State Govt of Odisha."
3. Since the averments made in the application prima facie raised substantial questions relating to environment arising out of the implementation of the enactments specified in Schedule-I to the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, this Tribunal, vide order dated 19.02.2024, constituted a Joint Committee comprising of representatives of Central Pollution Control Board, Integrated Regional Office MoEF&CC, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, Principal Secretary, Water Resource Department, Odisha, Odisha State Pollution Control Board and the District Magistrate, Cuttack and directed the same to verify the factual position and suggest appropriate remedial action to the concerned Authorities. The Odisha State Pollution Control Board was made the nodal agency for coordination and compliance.
4. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case including the fact that the place of accrual of cause of action was within jurisdiction of the Eastern Zone Bench of this Tribunal at Kolkata, the Registry was directed vide order dated 19.02.2024 to list the matter before the Eastern Zone Bench of this Tribunal at Kolkata on 23.04.2024 after obtaining orders from Hon'ble the Chairperson for transfer of the case.
5. The application was listed before the Hon'ble Eastern Zone Bench of this Tribunal on 23.04.2024. Hon'ble Eastern Zone Bench of this Tribunal noticed intemperate language used by the applicant in the original application and expressed its disapproval of use of such intemperate O.A. No. 21/2024 Shailesh Sahoo Vs. State of Odisha & Ors.
5language and declined to entertain the original application while making reference to Hon'ble Chairperson for necessary orders/placing before some other Bench.
6. Under orders of Hon'ble the Chairperson, the matter was listed before this Bench. This Bench observed that averments made in the application regarding encroachments and raising of illegal construction over Mahanadi River bed under Naya Bazar Block of Cuttack City in District Cuttack, Odisha raised serious environmental questions and the original application could not be thrown on the ground of use of intemperate language in the application by the applicant. On the other hand appropriate action was required to be taken against the applicant for use of such intemperate language in accordance with law. This Tribunal also issued directions to the learned Registrar General for issuance of appropriate instructions for processing of letter petitions in view of the observations made in order dated 22.05.2024 after obtaining appropriate orders from Hon'ble the Chairperson.
7. In view of the averments in the application, (1) State of Odisha through Chief Secretary, Government of Odisha, (2) Additional Chief Secretary, Forest, Environment Department and Climate Change, Government of Odisha, (3) Principal Secretary, Water and Resources Department, Government of Odisha (4) Vice Chairman, Cuttack Development Authority, (5) Member Secretary, Odisha State Pollution Control Board and (6) the District Magistrate, Cuttack were impleaded as respondents No. 1 to 6. Vide order dated 22.05.2024 the Registry was directed to prepare and attach memo of parties to the application and issue notices to respondents No. 1 to 6 requiring them to file their replies/responses with respect to encroachments and raising of illegal O.A. No. 21/2024 Shailesh Sahoo Vs. State of Odisha & Ors.
6constructions over Mahanadi River bed under Naya Bazar Block of Cuttack City.
8. In compliance of order dated 19.02.2024 read with order dated 22.05.2024, report of the Joint Committee (pages no. 03-134 of the paper book) was filed by OSPCB vide affidavit dated 16.08.2024 filed vide email dated 18.08.2025. The relevant part of the report of the Joint Committee reads as under:-
"X X X X VI. JOINT COMMITTEE OBSERVATION DURING SITE VISITON 16.04.2024
1. Mr. Sandeep Roy, Scientist D, Central Pollution Control Board.
ii. Mr. T.H. Mahato, Scientist D, Regional Office, MoEF&CC, Bhubaneswar, Odisha.
iii. Mr. Shibo Toppo, Additional District Magistrate, Cuttack. iv. Er. Rajesh Mohanty, Superintending Engineer, Mahanadi South Division, Cuttack (Water Resource Department, Odisha). v. Er. Rashmita Priyadarshini, Regional Officer, State Pollution Control Board, Regional Office, Cuttack.
vi. Mr. Siddik Khan, Assistant Town Planner, Cuttack Municipal Corporation.
vii. Remana Jafrl, Block Development Officer (B.D.O.) Sadar Block, Cuttack.
The committee members and officials visited the alleged site i.e. Kanheipur, Bhogamba, Bhadimula, CRRI, Gati Rout Patna, Diha Sahi and Biribati. During site visit it was observed that construction works have been carried out in the said areas for domestic and commercial usage. The construction has been carried out between the river Mahanadi streamandits embankment road. The construction activity includes Residential Building, Educational Institute (St. Xavier School- Bhadimula, Saraswati Sishu Mandir- Gatiroutpatana etc.), Temple. The land available between the embankment road and river stream is also used for agriculture purpose by local populace. After site visit a meeting was held by the committee members and it was unanimously decided that a joint report may be sought by the Additional District Magistrate, Cuttack from the concerned departments i.e. Cuttack Municipal Corporation (CMC), Cuttack Development Authority (CDA) and Tahasildar, Cuttack Sadar regarding the illegal constructions and encroachment of those alleged areas at the earliest. On receiving of the report from the concerned departments, if required, the committee members may undertake the site visit and conduct a meeting for submission of the detailed report including the factual status before the Hon'ble NGT as necessary compliance. Proceedings of the site visit is enclosed as ANNEXURE-III.
X X X X O.A. No. 21/2024 Shailesh Sahoo Vs. State of Odisha & Ors. 7
IX. As per the decision taken by the Joint Committee during the site visit, the Additional District Magistrate, Cuttack sought a joint inspection report to the Commissioner, Cuttack Municipal Corporation (CMC), Secretary, Cuttack Development Authority (CDA) and Tahasildar, Cuttack Sadar vide his letter dated 12.06.2024 for submission of compliance report before the Hon'ble Tribunal.
X. JOINT COMMITTEE MEETING HELD ON 03.07.2024. A meeting was held on 03.07.2024 in presence of Joint Committee Members and officials from CMC, CDA and Tahasildar, Cuttack Sadar to expedite the matter for submission of joint inspection report by CMC, CDA and Tahasildar. In the said meeting following decisions were taken; a. The Cuttack Municipal Corporation (CMC), Cuttack Development Authority (CDA) and Tahasildar, Cuttack will start their joint survey on dtd. 05.07.2024 w.r.t illegal constructions and encroachment on the alleged areas and submit the report by 10.07.2024 to the Joint Committee.
b. After getting the report, the Joint Committee shall revisit the alleged areas on 15.07.2024 and submit the report before Hon'ble NGT, PB New Delhi.
The minutes of the meeting was communicated by the Regional Officer, SPCB, Cuttack on dated 05.07.2024 to CMC, CDA and Tahasildar, Cuttack Sadar for necessary compliance and to the Joint Committee members for information. Minutes of the meeting and the attendance sheet are enclosed as ANNEXURE-IV & V. XI. Subsequently the members of the Joint Committee and officials from CMC, CDA and Tahasildar, Cuttack Sadar were assembled on 15.07.2024 in the chamber of Addl. District Magistrate, Cuttack to discuss about the findings of the joint inspection report of CMC, CDA and Tahasildar, Cuttack Sadar. List of members present on 15.07.2024 is annexed as ANNEXURE-VI. The committee members observed that field survey was completed but report was yet to be submitted by CMC, CDA and Tahasildar, Cuttack Sadar. Further CMC, CDA and Tahasildar, Cuttack Sadar sought for support of Water Resource Department while preparation of report in order to demarcation of river boundary, river berm and existing embankment of River Mahanadi. Er. Rajesh Mohanty, Superintending Engineer, Mahanadi South Division, Cuttack (Water Resource Department, Odisha) who is also the member of the Joint Committee agreed to extend his support during preparation of report.
XII. JOINT INSPECTION REPORT SUBMITTED BY CDA, CMC, TAHASILDAR, CUTTACK SADAR AND SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, MAHANADI SOUTH DIVISION Mr. Sujay Kumar Pati, Tahasildar, Cuttack Sadar, Er. Rajesh Mohanty, Superintending Engineer, Mahanadi South Division, Cuttack, Mr. Siddik Khan Asst. Town Planner, CMC, and Mr. Bishnu Prasad Sahoo, Asst. Town Planner, CDA submitted the joint inspection report to the Joint Committee. The joint inspection report is annexed as ANNEXURE-VII along with following annexure;
1. Table: Revenue village wise factual status based on the primary survey as ANNEXURE-VIII;
2. Map showing catchment area of River Mahanadi under Chauliaganj & CRRI Police Station as ANNEXURE-IX; O.A. No. 21/2024 Shailesh Sahoo Vs. State of Odisha & Ors.
83. Information on the land situated inside the embankment road next to the Mahanadi in Unit-26- Sikharpur village, Kanheipur village, Bhadimula village, Banabidyadharpur village and Gateiroutpatna village as ANNEXURE-X, XI, XII, XIII, XIV;
XIII. REMARKS:
The joint report of Tahasildar, Cuttack Sadar, Superintending Engineer, Mahanadi South Division, Cuttack, Asst. Town Planner CDA and CMC Indicates that part of 05 Revenue villages namely Sikharpur, Kanheipur, Bhadimula, Banabidyadharpur and Gateiroutpatna are located along the Mahanadi River bed i.e., located in between the existing embankment road and river. The construction status on the said area is mentioned in the joint inspection report at ANNEXURE-VII."
9. Affidavit dated 12.10.2024 (pages no. 135-139 of the paper book) was filed by the Member Secretary on behalf of respondent no.5- OSPCB pleading that the allegations regarding encroachment of river Mahanadi catchments/corridors by illegal constructions did not come within the purview of its consent administration.
10. We convey our displeasure and observe that abovesaid affidavit is based on completely wrong perception of the environmental laws, particularly, the Water (Prevention and control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 and constitutional and statutory obligations of OSPCB for protection and improvement of environment, forest and rivers.
11. Preliminary Affidavit dated 30.01.2025 (pages no. 140-240 of the paper book) was filed by Respondent no.1 via email dated 31.01.2025.
However, said affidavit did not contain any information worth the name with respect to the averments made in the letter petition treated as original application.
12. Affidavit dated 19.03.2025 (pages no. 241-267 of the paper book) was filed by Respondent No. 4. The relevant part of the affidavit reads as under:-
O.A. No. 21/2024 Shailesh Sahoo Vs. State of Odisha & Ors.9
"5. That it is pertinent to mention here that pursuant to the decision of Government and consequential decision of the Authority on dt.19.08.2019, the power concerning granting permission for construction as required under Section 15 & 16 of the ODA Act and initiation of proceeding for unauthorized construction or deviated constructions within corporation area have been delegated to Cuttack Municipal Corporation from CDA vide letter no.10975/dt.22.08.2019 and since then the Cuttack Municipal Corporation is in seisin of the matter. A copy of the said Notification and delegation made by the authority are filed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE-A/4 for kind perusal.
6. That the deponent humbly submits that the allegation made in the application refers to 7 (seven) number of areas/ mouzas. The particulars of the area with reference to the Record of Right maintained in revenue side have been furnished in detail in the Joint Inspection Report which the deponent adopts so also the facts stated therein for the sake of brevity. It is once again humbly reiterated that Sikharpur, Kanheipur, Gatiroutapatna, Bhadimula are coming within the Cuttack Municipal Corporation area and as such the Cuttack Municipal Corporation deals with the Planning functions and proceeding concerning initiation of unauthorized deviated construction in those areas.
7. That the record reveals that there are few applications for permission for residential & other construction have been granted by CDA before the areas were dealt with and handed over for Cuttack Municipal Corporation. The approval for granting permission for construction over plots basing upon ROR and affidavits submitted u/s-16 of ODA Act. The aforesaid mouzas were included within CDA since its initiation and as such there is no permission granted over where the kissam is river or nadibandha. CDA while granting permission strictly adhered to the ROR to ascertain the status of the land. Unless the land use found contrary to Comprehensive Development Plan prepared and restricts grant of permission as per Building Regulation and subsequent ODA rule 2020 framed, and rules applicable during those period such application is not considered for granting permission.
8. That regarding mouza Kanheipur, Gatiroutapatna, Bhadimul and Bidyadharpur (CRRI), while under CDA, the record further reveals that, no permission for construction have been granted/approved by CDA constituting a part of river bed in case referred to in the RO.R. prepared by the settlement authority and up dated by the Tahasildar and conversion allowed by Tahsildar for residential use in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 8 (A) of the OLR Act.
9. That the mouza Bhogamba is not coming within the jurisdiction of CDA till date and to the knowledge of the deponent the same is under the jurisdiction of Sadar Block.
10. That as regards Dihasahi upto Biribati, there existed different mouzas. Unless specification of the mouzas mentioned referred to, it becomes difficult to give detailed particulars concerning permission, if any, granted in respect of any plot situated within such areas. However, it is once again submitted that, CDA all along ensured to verify the status of the land and its permissible use as per the Comprehensive Development Plan, the building Regulation and the present ODA Building Rule O.A. No. 21/2024 Shailesh Sahoo Vs. State of Odisha & Ors.10
2020, before granting permission for any construction and on principle it does not grant any permission for construction in case the revenue plot referred to stood recorded as river and/or river bed and/or connected with river bed.
11. That at the outset it is submitted that, Biribati is one of the mouza situated between Dhiasahi and Biribati and the said mouza has been included within CDA area recently vide notification of Government in H & UD Department dated 2nd May 2023, copy of which is enclosed as ANNEXURE- B/4 for kind perusal. That as on date i.e. from 2nd May 2023 to 1st March, 2025, CDA not granted permission for construction of building required under Section 15 and 16 in MouzaBiribati."
13. Response affidavit dated 26.03.2025 (pages no. 268-367 of the paper book) was filed by Respondent No. 3. The relevant part of the affidavit reads as under:-
"5. That, the aforesaid report dated 23.07.2024 is clear to the effect that encroachment/unauthorized constructions do exist so far as the area mentioned in the OA is concerned. The said report further enumerates the role/responsibility and administrative jurisdiction of the respective Opp. Party authorities and in view of the same, it is most humbly submitted that matters related to regulating development/construction of buildings in terms of building plan approval and enforcement of the same as per provisions contained under the ODA Act, 1982 and the ODA (P&BS) Rules, 2020, lies within the ambit/ role and duties of CDA and CMC authorities and the present deponent has no role in the same. So far as the duty and responsibilities of the present deponent i.e. Water Resources Department is concerned it is most humbly submitted that its role, as laid down in the aforesaid report is to deal with "Flood issues management such as embankment protection, construction of spurs, launching apron and packing, construction of bed bars, etc in order to protect life and property of locals from any flood like situation."
14. Vide order dated 23.04.2025, the Municipal Corporation, Cuttack through its Commissioner was impleaded as Respondent No. 7.
15. Vide order dated 23.04.2025, the Chief Secretary, Government of Odisha, the Additional Chief Secretary, Forest, Environment and Climate Change Department, Government of Odisha, the Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Odisha, the Vice-Chairman, Cuttack Development Authority, the District Magistrate, Cuttack and the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Cuttack were directed to file their own affidavits with reference to the averments made in the original O.A. No. 21/2024 Shailesh Sahoo Vs. State of Odisha & Ors.
11application, observations made in the report of the Joint Committee, determination of Flood Plain Zone of River Mahanadi, encroachments and illegal constructions on the land of River Mahanadi and steps taken for removal of such encroachments and illegal constructions.
16. In compliance of order dated 23.04.2025, affidavit dated 08.07.2025 (pages no. 374-385 of the paper book) was filed by Tahsildar, Sadar, Cuttack on behalf of respondent no.6- Collector and District Magistrate, Cuttack. The relevant part of the affidavit reads as under:-
"X X X X
3. That, the allegation made in the Original Application refers to seven mouzas/villages i.e. Kanheipur, Bhogamba, Bhadimula, CRRI, Gatiroutpatna, Diha Sahi and Biribati. In this context it is apt to state that four mouzas vis-à-vis- Sikharpur, Kanheipur, Gatiroutpatna and Bhadimula are coming under the jurisdiction of the Cuttack Development Authority (CDA) and Cuttack Municipal Corporation (CMC) being declared as such under the provisions of the Odisha Development Authorities Act, 1982. This has been clearly stated/elaborated in affidavit dated 19.03.2025 filed by Respondent No.4 i.e. CDA before this Hon'ble Tribunal. As such, CDA/CMC deal with the planning, function and initiation of appropriate proceedings in regard to unauthorised constructions in those areas. Apart from the said four mouzas, it is most humbly submitted that Bhogamba is a hamlet of Banabidyadharpur Revenue village which finds place as CRRI in the Original Application and Bidyadharpur in affidavit dated 19.03.2025 filed by as CDA. The said area CRRI/ Bhogamba is part of the Revenue Village Banabidyadharpur which comes under the jurisdiction of CDA. Similarly Dihasahi is a hamlet of Revenue Village Gatiroutpatna which also comes under CDA's jurisdiction. The village Biribati as has been mentioned in the Original Application also lies within the jurisdiction of CDA coming under CDP area recently. Copy of the R.I report in this regard is annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE-A/6.
4. That it is most humbly submitted that the aforesaid areas having been declared as 'development areas' have been included under the jurisdiction of CDA which is to regulate all matters pertaining to such areas as per the Provisions Contained under the Odisha Development Authority Act, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, 1982 in short) and the Rules framed thereunder. Section 91 of Act, 1982 makes provision for removal of unauthorized development and is reproduced hereinbelow for ready reference of this Hon'ble Tribunal:
xxxx
91. Removal of unauthorised development (1) Where any development has been commenced or is being carried on or O.A. No. 21/2024 Shailesh Sahoo Vs. State of Odisha & Ors.12
has been, completed in contravention of the development plan or without the permission, approval or sanction referred to in Section 15 or in contravention of any condition subject to which such permission, approval or sanction has been granted [or any development deemed to be a development undertaken, carried out of completed without a permission as referred to in Section 15 under Clause (b-1) of Sub-section (2) of Section 128] any officer of the Authority empowered by it in this behalf, may in addition to any prosecution that may be instituted under this Act, make an order directing that such development shall be removed by demolition, falling or otherwise [or secured by sealing] by the owner thereof or by the person at whose instance the development has been commenced or is being carried out or has been completed, within such period not being less than five days and more than fifteen days from the date on which a copy of the order of removal, with a brief statement of the reasons therefor, has been delivered to the owner or that person as may be specified in the order and on his failure to comply with the order, the officer of the Authority may remove or [cause to be removed the development or seal or cause to be sealed such development and the expenses incurred therefor] shall be recovered from the owner or the person at whose instance the development was commenced or was being carried out or was completed as arrears of land revenue:
Provided that no such order shall be made unless the owner or the person concerned has been given reasonable opportunity to show cause why the order should not be made. (2) Any person aggrieved by an order under Sub-section (1) may appeal to the State Government or an Officer appointed by the State Government in this behalf, against that order within thirty days from the date thereof, and the Government or the Officer, as the case may be, may after hearing the parties to the appeal either allow or dismiss the appeal or may reverse or vary any part of the order. The decision of the State Government or the Officer shall be final and shall not be questioned in any Court of law.
(3) The provisions of this section shall be in addition to, and not in derogation of any other provision relating to demolition of buildings contained in any other law for the time being in force. xxxx"
The term "Unauthorized Construction has been defined under Rule 2 (cxlix) of the Odisha Development Authorities (Planning and Building Standards) Rules, 2020 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules, 2020 in short) which has been framed pursuant to the provisions contained under Section 125 of the Act, 1982. The said Rule 2 (cxlix) is reproduced hereinbelow for ready reference of this Hon'ble Tribunal.
xxxxx 2 (cxlix) "unauthorized construction" means the erection or re- erection, addition or alternation which is not approved or sanctioned by the Authority;
Also, Rule 6(2)(xi) of the aforesaid Rules, 2020 which makes provision for action to be taken against unauthorized constructions is also reproduced hereinbelow for ready reference of this Hon'ble Tribunal:
xxxxx O.A. No. 21/2024 Shailesh Sahoo Vs. State of Odisha & Ors.13
In case, the authority or urban local body having appropriate jurisdiction at any time identify unauthorised construction or violation of the standard building plan or violation of any of the provisions prescribed in this rule, then such construction shall be deemed as unauthorised construction and such plot owner shall be liable for action under the provisions of Odisha Development Authorities Act, 1982 and rules and regulations framed thereunder and the decision of the competent authority shall be final; xxxx It is therefore clear that the appropriate competent authority(s) under the Act, 1982 and the Rules framed there under have been empowered to take action/demolish/regularize all unauthorized constructions erected within the areas declared to be development areas by initiating appropriate proceedings against the concerned persons by following the procedure laid down for the same under the Act, 1982 and the Rules framed thereunder.
5. That, the deponent humbly submits that, mouza Kanheipur, to Gatiroutpatna, Bhadimula and Banabidyadharpur (CRRI) come under the yellow zone (general residential zone) of CDA's Comprehensive Development Plan (CDP) whereby under the land situated in those mouzas can be convented Non- Agricultural land under section 8 (A) of OLR Act, 1960 if permitted by CDA. Accordingly conversion cases in those mouzas were allowed to be filed till filling of the present O.A but, presently, the concerned Revenue Inspectors have been suitably instructed by the Tahasildar, Sadar, Cuttack to clarify effect of O.A case or conversion of land under section 8 (A) of OLR Act in the areas which have been mentioned in the Original Application.
The copy of the said letter dated 17.05.2025 is annexed here with as ANNEXURE-B/6.
6. That similarly, as all the seven mouzas as aforesaid are in Yellow zone areas of CDA's Comprehensive Development Plan, the Vice Chairman, CDA and Commissioner, CMC have been requested separately by the Tahasildar, Sadar, Cuttack to move the Government in Housing & Urban Development Department for imposition of restriction in the said areas for conversion under section 8(A) of OLR Act.
Copy of such letter dated 29.05.2025 is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-C/6."
17. Affidavit dated 08.07.2025 was filed by OSD-Cum- Engineer and Chief, Water Resources, Orissa on behalf of respondents no.1 and 3 (pages no. 386 to 396 of the paper book). The relevant part of the affidavit reads as under:-
"X X X X
3. That, the allegation made in the Original Application refers to seven mouzas/villages i.e. Kanheipur, Bhogamba, Bhadimula, CRRI, Gatiroutpatna, Diha Sahi and Biribati, all of which are coming under the jurisdiction of the Cuttack Development Authority (CDA) and Cuttack Municipal Corporation (CMC) being O.A. No. 21/2024 Shailesh Sahoo Vs. State of Odisha & Ors.
14declared as such under the provisions of the Odisha Development Authorities Act, 1982. As such, CDA/CMC deal with the planning, function and initiation of appropriate proceedings in regard to unauthorised constructions in those areas which have been declared as 'development areas as per the provisions contained under the Odisha Development Authority Act, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, 1982 in short) and the Rules framed thereunder.
X X X X
4. That, accordingly, the appropriate competent authority under the Act, 1982 i.e. CDA as well as CMC have been intimated about the threat posed to the flood plain zone and embankment of Mahanadi river due to the illegal constructions present therein, as pointed out in the joint inspection report dated 23.07.2024, while requesting the authority(s) to take necessary action to remove such illegal constructions in order to protect the river bed and embankment vide letter no. 6922, dated 03.07.2025."
18. Affidavit dated 08.07.2025 was filed by respondents no. 4 (pages no.
397-405 of the paper book). The relevant part of the affidavit reads as under:-
"X X X X
4. That at the outset it is once again humbly submitted that Sikharpur, Kanheipur, Gatiroutpatna and Bhadimul are the independent mouzas under CDP area. All these Four Mouzas are presently under the development, control of Cuttack Municipal Corporation. Any unauthorized deviated constructions in those mouzas are to be taken up by Cuttack Municipal Corporation pursuant to the authorization made by CDA in its 122nd Authority Meeting held on 19.8.2019 pursuant to the decision of the Government in the H&UD Department, a copy of which is filed herewith and marked as Annexure C/4 for kind perusal.
5. That since 19.08.2019, the CMC is deciding with Planning and demolition of the unauthorized construction(s) within the CMC controlled area. Accordingly, Field Staffs Competent Authority of CMC initiates proceedings under Section 91 of ODA Act. At the outset it is submitted that, the Superintendenting Engineer, Mahanadi South Division in its letter No. 6631 dated 30.6.2025 received in the diary of CDA on dated 5.7.2025 referred to four numbers of unauthorized construction in mouja village Sikharpur. Those unauthorized constructions are to be dealt with by the Cuttack Municipal Corporation and accordingly, CDA in its letter No. 7479 dated 9.7.2025 of CDA forwarded to the Commissioner of Cuttack Municipal Corporation for taking necessary steps. In this regard copy of the letter dated 30.6.2025 received on 5.7.2025 is filed herewith and marked as Annexure D/4 and copy of the letter No. 7479 dated 9.7.2025 is filed herewith and marked Annexure E/4 for kind perusal. As Annexure E/4 for kind perusal.
O.A. No. 21/2024 Shailesh Sahoo Vs. State of Odisha & Ors.
156.That at the outset it is humbly submitted that in view of the aforesaid delegation made by CDA, the CMC is authorized and competent to initiate proceeding and also to deal with the pending proceedings in case of unauthorized construction/ deviated constructions reported in the said moujas.
7.That as regards "Bhogamba Village" it is a hamlet of Bana Bidyadharpur in short Bidyadharpur, revenue village/mouza. Be that as it may, the applicant referred to village Bhogmba, which to the knowledge and impression of the deponent was is under the jurisdiction of Sadar Block and is not within CDA areas. It is submitted that under and after detailed verification with Revenue Officer and the Affidavit submitted before Hon'ble Tribunal it is ascertained that this hamlet is coming under the and part of Mz: Banabidyadharpur, Presently, Bidyadharpur and theCRRI(Central Rice Research In) are coming within the jurisdiction of CMC.
8. That similarly "Dihasahi" is a hamlet village of Mz: Gatirout Patna which is coming presently within the CMC area and as such presently CMC is dealing with the adjudication concerning to the proceedings under Section 91 of ODA Act and application concerning Building and Planning.
9. That as regards "Biribati", which was included within the CDA area vide Notification dated 2nd May, 2023 as referred to in Annexure B/4 to the Affidavit filed on dated 19.04.2025. As regards to the permission for construction is required under section 15 and 16 of the ODA Act, CDA has not granted any such permission for construction of building in the said area on and from the date it comes within the jurisdiction of CDA from 2nd May, 2023.
10. That the deponent humbly submits that as per the provisions of ODA Act, CDA prepared the Comprehensive Development Plan under the name of vision-2030 dividing the areas into different land use zones, may be comprised of one mouza and/or more than one. The CDP after its confirmation/approval in the year 2010 by the Government in H & UD Department continues in force. As regards to the areas covered under CMC, it adopts the said CDP and land use specified therein. As regards the mouzas referred to by the petitioner are coming under the Yellow zone (residential zone). The areas within a zone comprised of the residential and other than residential plots. As such any land recorded in the status other than the residential use are to be converted into residential use as per the provision of Section 8-A of OLR Act in compliance of the procedure prescribed in the said Act.
11. That the facts would reveal that the areas/plots specified in the status as river and/or river bed in any Mouza, no permission for construction is allowed/granted by CDA under the status changes. The deponent humbly once again reiterates that the contention made in the Affidavit dated 19.3.2025 and assures/ ensures all such co-operation sought for by any of the departments/ agencies in order to protect the river and for the purpose in case reported and in case the area comes within its jurisdiction, shall dealt with under the suitable provisions under ODA Act."
O.A. No. 21/2024 Shailesh Sahoo Vs. State of Odisha & Ors.
1619. Vide order dated 11.07.2025, respondents no. 1 and 3 were directed to file additional response with respect to the aspects of (a) demarcation of flood plain zone and rejuvenation of river (b) identification and removal of encroachments on river bed and active flood plain zone and (c) tapping of drains falling in the river for preventing discharge of untreated domestic sewage/industrial effluents in the river.
20. In compliance thereof, affidavit dated 01.09.2025 (pages no. 406- 415 of the paper book) was filed by respondents 1 and 3. The relevant part of the affidavit reads as under:-
"X X X X
4.That, the demarcation of flood plan zone of the river Mahanadi has been duly carried by Respondent No.3 in pursuance to the aforesaid Order passed by this Hon'ble Tribunal. It is most humbly submitted that in Mouza Sikharpur there is Ac.212.744 dec. of land in total, out of which area in the Flood Plain Zone is Ac.42.656 dec. and total number of plots in the Flood Plane Zone is 387. Similarly, in Mouza Kahneipur there is Ac.644.67 dec. of land in total, out of which area in the Flood Plain Zone is Ac.170.113 dec. and total number of plots in the Flood Plane Zone is 699. Similarly, in Mouza Bhadimula there is Ac.352.75 dec. of land in total, out of which area in the Flood Plain Zone is Ac.104.000 dec. and total number of plots in the Flood Plane Zone is 143. Similarly, in Mouza - Banabidyadharpur there is Ac.283.64 dec. of land in total, out of which area in the Flood Plain Zone is Ac.189.310 dec. and total number of plots in the Flood Plane Zone is 148. Similarly, in Mouza Gatiroutpatana there is Ac.918.07 dec. of land in total, out of which area in the Flood Plain Zone is Ac.432.620 dec. and total number of plots in the Flood Plane Zone is 926.
Copy of maps showing demarcation of the flood plan zone of Mahanadi rive in relation to the Mouzas Sikharpur, Kahneipur, Bhadimula, Banabidyadharpur & Gatiroutpatana are annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE - A/3 Series.
5. That, so far as identification and removal of encroachments on the river bed and active flood plain zone is concerned, it is most humbly submitted that necessary action in this regard has to be taken by the Cuttack Development Authority/Cuttack Municipal Corporation, being the appropriate competent authority(s) under the Orissa Development Authorities Act, 1982 and the Rules framed thereunder, as has been explained in detail in Affidavit dated 08.07.2025 filed previously by the present deponent. In this regard a letter inter alia, requesting for necessary action to be taken in so far as removal of encroachments is. concerned dated 03.07.2025 had been issued earlier to the competent authorities and the same had been filed before this Hon'ble O.A. No. 21/2024 Shailesh Sahoo Vs. State of Odisha & Ors.
17Tribunal as Annexure-A/3 to Affidavit dated 08.07.2025. Now after demarcation of flood plain zone of Mahanadi river as aforesaid, the appropriate authorities have been informed of the same, supplied with the relevant documents/sketch maps relating to such demarcation and requested once again to make the said area encroachment free vide office letter no.8706, dated 25.08.2025, copy of which is filed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE-B/3 for kind perusal of this Hon'ble Tribunal. that comes same under Similarly, so far as the third aspect i.e. tapping of drains falling in the river for preventing discharge of untreated domestic sewage / industrial effluents in the river is concerned, it is most humbly submitted once again the the domain/jurisdiction of the Cuttack Municipal Corporation as well as the Odisha Water Supply and Sewerage Board, who have been requested by the present deponent by way of the aforesaid letter dated 25.08.2025 to take necessary action."
21. Vide order dated 04.09.2025, respondent no. 7 was directed to file additional response with respect to the submissions/observations made in affidavit dated 01.09.2025 filed by respondents no. 1 and 3.
22. In compliance thereof, affidavit dated 03.09.2025 (pages no. 416- 431 of the paper book) was filed by the Commissioner on behalf of respondent no.7-Cuttack Municipal Corporation vide email dated 15.10.2025. The relevant part of the affidavit reads as under:-
"X X X X
4. That, in this regard it is humbly submitted that the areas, which are mentioned by the Applicant in this Original Application, come under part of 05 Revenue Villages namely Sikharpur, Kanheipur, Bhadimula, Banabidyadharpur & Gateirout Patna which are located along the Mahanadi River bed in between the existing Embankment road and the River.
5. That, out of above 05 Revenue Villages, 04 Revenue Villages except Gateirout Patna, are coming under the Cuttack Municipal Corporation jurisdiction.
6. That, regarding raising of illegal constructions over Mahanadi River Bed, it is humbly submitted that, in course of a local enquiry conducted by the field staff/Amins of the Cuttack Municipal Corporation on 25.08.2025 in presence of the Assistant Commissioner (Land), it was noticed that, construction of residential buildings with concrete structure, boundary wall and other commercial set ups have been erected in the said zone. It has also been ascertained that some of the lands of the said locality have already been merged with the river course with the passage of time due to soil erosion and change in the course of the river. True copy of the Enquiry Report dated 25.08.2025 as stated above is annexed herewith and is marked as Annexure- A/7.
O.A. No. 21/2024 Shailesh Sahoo Vs. State of Odisha & Ors.
187. That, the Planning function of the Cuttack Development Authority (CDA) was transferred to Cuttack Municipal Corporation (CMC) w.e.f 01.09.2019 as per the power delegation order of the Housing & Urban Development (H&UD) Department, Govt. of Odisha, issued vide Letter No.-14749/HUD dated 17.08.2019. There is no record available in the office of Cuttack Municipal Corporation regarding the developments which took place prior to such delegation of power in the year-2019. True copy of the Letter No.-14749/HUD dated 17.08.2019 issued by the Govt. in H & U.D Department, Odisha is annexed herewith and is marked as ANNEXURE-B/7.
8. That, it is humbly submitted that, the Sikharpur and Kanheipur area are high density urbanized area as located in close proximity to the city. Whereas, the Bhadimul and Gateirout Patna are relatively low-density urbanised area. The Banabidyadharpur area is not yet urbanised.
9. That, the concerned area which is situated between the embankment road and River Mahanadi are mostly falling under the Environmentally Sensitive Zone as per the Landuse classification proposed in the Comprehensive Development Plan (CDP) 2030 of Cuttack Development Plan Area, wherein, the construction of building shall be permitted if the following conditions are satisfied as per the Regulation 22(7) of the CDA (P & BS) Regulation, 2017.
i. The minimum size of the plot shall be 4000 sq. m. ii. The minimum width of the approach road shall be 12 m. iii. The maximum coverage shall not exceed 40% of the area. iv. The proposal for development shall only be considered on recommendation of Development Plan and Building Permission (DP and BP) Committee with representatives from Water Resource Department, Odisha State Pollution Control Board and Public Health Engineering Department in the above Committee.
10. That, in view of the above restrictive conditions, no application for permission to raise construction has been received at Cuttack Municipal Corporation from the inhabitants of the above revenue villages since the time of transfer of Planning function to CMC, as the minimum size of the plot is 4000 sq. m. for consideration of the proposal for approval.
11. That, it is humbly submitted that, regarding raising of unauthorized construction in the above site, no complaint has been received by the Cuttack Municipal Corporation from any quarter for taking appropriate steps as per the provisions of law.
12. That, it is humbly submitted that, the Comprehensive Development Plan (CDP), 2030 of Cuttack envisages construction of 200 feet wide embankment road which would originate from National Highway-16 (NH-16) and connect the Paradip road and that, if such an embankment road is developed, then a major portion of land where construction is undertaken may be protected from getting merged with the river course on account of soil erosion. Moreover, since the Cuttack Municipal Corporation area is surrounded by distributaries of Mahanadi River from all sides, provision is required to be made to protect the Cuttack City urban area with a continuous Ring Road along the river beds as proposed in the Comprehensive Development Plan (CDP), 2030, which will protect the valuable urban land from flood like situation and soil erosion."
O.A. No. 21/2024 Shailesh Sahoo Vs. State of Odisha & Ors.
1923. We have gone through the replies/responses filed by the respondents and we find that no action worth the name has been taken by respondents no. 1 to 7 despite directions given by this Tribunal and number of adjournments granted.
24. We also express our displeasure that despite direction given vide order dated 23.04.2025 to the Chief Secretary, Government of Odisha, the Additional Chief Secretary, Forest, Environment and Climate Change Department, Government of Odisha, the Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Odisha and the Vice-Chairman, Cuttack Development Authority, the District Magistrate, Cuttack to file their own affidavits, affidavits have not been filed by them. The State of Odisha and its officers and instrumentalities are under constitutional and statutory obligations for taking requisite action for protection and improvement of environment and we expect prompt discharge of the said obligations by the abovementioned officers also.
25. We also take this opportunity to remind them that despite expiry of more than two years since the passing of first order on the present O.A. no action has been taken by respondents no. 1 to 7.
26. We constitute a Joint Committee comprising representatives of Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (C), MoEF&CC Regional Office, Bhubaneswar and of the Chief Secretary, Government of Odisha and the Additional Chief Secretary, Forest, Environment and Climate Change Department, Government of Odisha, the Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Odisha, the Vice-Chairman, Cuttack Development Authority, the District Magistrate, Cuttack and the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Bhubaneswar (the O.A. No. 21/2024 Shailesh Sahoo Vs. State of Odisha & Ors.
20abovementioned officers themselves and not their representatives) to look into the grievances raised in the O.A. and also the aspects highlighted by this Tribunal in the orders already passed, verify the factual position and suggest appropriate remedial measures and submit interim/final report to this Tribunal with a copy to the concerned authorities within 15 days.
27. The Additional Chief Secretary, Forest, Environment and Climate Change Department, Government of Odisha will be the nodal officer for coordination and compliance.
28. List on 20.04.2026 for further hearing.
29. A copy of this order may be sent to the Additional Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (C), MoEF&CC Regional Office, Bhubaneswar, Chief Secretary, Government of Odisha, Additional Chief Secretary, Forest, Environment and Climate Change Department, Government of Odisha, the Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Odisha, the Vice-Chairman, Cuttack Development Authority, the District Magistrate, Cuttack and the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Bhubaneswar.
Arun Kumar Tyagi, JM Dr. Afroz Ahmad, EM 2nd April, 2026 Original Application No. 21/2024 AM