Orissa High Court
WP(C)/24776/2020 on 1 October, 2020
Author: K.R.Mohapatra
Bench: K.R.Mohapatra
W.P.(C) No. 24776 of 2020
3. 01.10.2020 Due to outbreak of COVID-19, this matter is
taken up through Video Conferencing.
2. Heard Mr.Soumya Mishra, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr.D.K.Mohanry, learned
Additional Standing Counsel for the State-opposite
parties 2 and 3.
3. Petitioner in this writ petition seeks for a
direction to permit him to run his shop situated over
plot No.210 under Aska NAC in terms of the judgment
and decree dated 08.11.2005 and 02.12.2005 passed
by the learned Additional District Judge (Fast Track),
Aska in RFA No.138 of 2004. In the alternative, he
has prayed for a direction to allot him an alternate
land to run his business and earn his livelihood.
4. Mr.Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner was an occupant of the
aforesaid piece of land by constructing a shop room
thereon. The land in question belongs to Aska NAC.
While the petitioner was in possession over the said
plot, apprehending eviction he had moved the learned
Civil Judge (Senior Division), Aska in TS No.43 of
1998, which was decreed in his favour. Assailing the
same, the opposite party No.1-Aska NAC preferred
appeal in Title Appeal No.6 of 2000, which was
subsequently converted and registered as RFA No.134
of 2000; and the learned Ad hoc Additional District
-2-
Judge (Fast Track), Aska, vide his judgment dated
08.11.2005 held as follows:-
"10. In the result, the appeal is
allowed in part on contest. The plaintiff is
entitled to remain in possession over an
area of 5' x 4' as permitted to him by the
Appellant. The plaintiff is not entitled for
any damages from the Defendants. The
appeal is disposed of with the aforesaid
modification in the impugned judgment and
decree. The parties are directed to bear
their own cost."
As such, the petitioner was peacefully possessing the
said area of the aforesaid plot. Very recently, opposite
party No.1, without any notice and without following
procedure of law, demolished the entire shop room of
the petitioner in gross violation of the direction of the
learned Additional District Judge (Fast Track), Aska
in RFA No.138 of 2004. It is submitted that the said
judgment and decree has never been challenged and
has reached its finality. Hence, the present writ
petition has been filed for the direction as aforesaid.
5. In course of hearing, Mr.Mishra, learned
counsel for the petitioner submits that if the aforesaid
land is objectionable, he may be allotted a suitable
piece of alternate site to earn his business and
undertakes to make a representation to that effect
before the Executive Officer, NAC, Aska and prays for
-3-
a direction for early disposal of the same in
accordance with law.
6. Mr.D.K.Mohanty, learned Additional Standing
Counsel for the State submits that since the State has
nothing to say in the matter, the petitioner may make
a representation before the opposite party No.1, if so
advised.
7. Taking into consideration the submissions of
learned counsel for the parties, this Court, without
expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,
disposes of the writ petition with a direction that in
the event petitioner files a representation for
allotment of alternative site/land to run his business
and earn his livelihood, before the opposite party
No.1, he shall do well to consider the same keeping in
mind the judgment and decree passed in RFA No.138
of 2004, as aforesaid.
8. With the aforesaid observation, the writ
petition stands disposed of.
8.1 An authenticated copy of this order
downloaded from the website of this Court shall be
treated at par with certified copy in the manner
prescribed in this Court's Notice No.4587 dated
25.03.2020.
ss ..............................
K.R.Mohapatra, J.
-4-
-J.