Orissa High Court
Purna Chandra Sahoo vs The State Of Odisha & Others ... Opp. ... on 4 February, 2021
Author: S.Pujahari
Bench: S.Pujahari
CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE S.PUJAHARI
W.P.(C) No.36866 of 2020
Purna Chandra Sahoo ... Petitioner
- Versus -
The State of Odisha & others ... Opp. Parties
ORDER
03. 04.02.2021 In the wake of the pandemic Covid-19, the case is taken up through V.C. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned counsel for the State, so also the learned counsel for Opposite Party No.5-Konark NAC.
The grievance of the petitioner is that though Hal Plot Nos.1142 and 1149/3013 of revenue Mouza- Konark in the district of Puri are their Stitiban land, inasmuch as in OEA proceeding, the same has been settled in the name of his father, Kunja Bihari Sahoo and during continuance of the present settlement, a draft ROR has also been prepared in his name as well as his two brothers vide Annexure-1 and they continued to remain in possession of the same since long in their own right, title and interest but, the Opposite Party (Konark NAC) is going to evict them from the said land for construction of "Septage Tank Micro Composting Centre-cum-Garbage Dumping Yard" and as such, he has come to this Court 2 seeking the relief to injunct the opposite parties not to disturb peaceful enjoyment of the said land by the petitioner, inter alia, other relief.
However, the counter affidavit has been filed by the Opposite Party-NAC stating therein that no decision has been taken to make any construction on the aforesaid land and construction is going to be made on the Government land which has not been possessed by anybody. It is also further stated that vide Government Letter No.3722/Rev. dated 30.12.2020, the allotted Plot Numbers are 1143(p), 1144(p), 1145(p), 1150(p), 1151(p), total area of 3 Acres.
However, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner apprehends that pursuant to such allotment, he is going to be evicted from the plots which are in his possession. But, the same has been denied by the learned counsel appearing for the Opposite Party (Konark NAC).
In view of the denial made by Konark NAC that no construction is going to be made in the plot which the petitioner claimed to be Stitiban land, this writ petition is disposed of with direction that if the petitioner is at all in possession of the aforesaid lands as on date, no eviction of the petitioner shall be 3 made by the Opposite Party (Konark NAC) without adhering to the due procedure of law.
Consequently, the I.A. stands closed. The parties may utilize the copy of this order as per the High Court's Notice No.4587 dated 25.03.2020.
.......................
S.Pujahari, J.
RKS