Orissa High Court
Gitanjali Das vs Collector & District Magistrate on 8 May, 2024
Author: B. P. Routray
Bench: B. P. Routray
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.18710 of 2019
Gitanjali Das .... Petitioner
Mr. G.N. Mishra, Advocate
-versus-
Collector & District Magistrate, .... Opposite Parties
Khurda and another
Mr. K. Das, A.S.C.
Mr.S.P. Biswal, Advocate on behalf of Mr.S. Mohanty,
Advocate for O.P. No.2
CORAM:
JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
ORDER
08.05.2024 Order No.
04. 1. Opposite Party No.2 appears through her counsel in the connected writ petition, i.e. W.P.(C) No.28511 of 2019. Accordingly, the notice on Opposite Party No.2 is treated sufficient through the counsel appearing for Opposite Party No.2 in the connected writ petition.
2. Heard Mr. G.N. Mishra, learned counsel for the Petitioner, Mr. K. Das, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State- Opposite Party No.1 and Mr. S.P. Biswal, learned counsel on behalf of Mr. S. Mohanty, learned counsel for Opposite Party No.2.
3. The order of the Collector, Khordha dated 2.2.2018 passed in Consolidation Misc. Case No.4/2014 under Annexure-1 is challenged in the present writ petition.
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Page 1 of 3 Reason: AuthenticationLocation: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 09-May-2024 17:47:38
4. The fact of the case is that, the mother of Opposite Party No.2 alienated the case land in favour of the Petitioner by virtue of RSD No.6897 dated 9.10.1991. Subsequently Opposite Party No.2, the daughter of the vendor, filed a petition under Sections 34 & 35 of the Odisha Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation of Land Act, 1972 (in short, "OCH & PFL Act") before the Collector praying to declare the said sale deed as void for violation of the provisions under Section 34 of the OCH & PFL Act. The Collector upon adjudication held that, the sale of land against the principles of prevention of fragmentation is illegal in view of the provisions contained in Sections 34 & 35 of the OCH & PFL Act and as such declared the Registered Sale Deed No. 6897 dated 9.10.1991 as void.
5. During pendency of the writ petition, the OCH & PFL Act underwent amendment in 2023. By way of the Amendment Act, 2023, Section 36A was inserted, which reads as follows:
"36A. Any transfer or partition of agricultural land in a locality creating fragmentation made under the Principal Act before the commencement of the Odisha Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation of Land (Amendment) Act, 2023, shall be treated as valid:
Provided that cases where any eviction has been made by the Collector under sub-section (2) of Section 35 of the Principal Act as omitted in this Act shall not be reopened".
6. It is agreed at the Bar that, the Petitioner is still in possession of the land sold to her under the RSD dated 9.10.1991and has not been evicted till date.
Signature Not Verified Page 2 of 3 Digitally SignedSigned by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 09-May-2024 17:47:38
7. Therefore, in view of the amended provision under Section 36A, the previous action of the vendor to sell the fragmented land in favour of the Petitioner vide RSD No.6897 dated 9.10.1991 is validated and thus the order of the Collector, Khordha becomes ineffective. As such, the direction of the Collector, Khordha to declare the sale deed as void has become inoperative and cannot be acted upon and consequently, RSD No.6897 dated 9.10.1991 is treated valid.
8. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of.
9. An urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.
( B.P. Routray) Judge B.K. Barik Signature Not Verified Page 3 of 3 Digitally Signed Signed by: BASANTA KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 09-May-2024 17:47:38