Orissa High Court
Santosh Kumar Sahoo And Ors vs State Of Odisha And Ors on 26 July, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.19905 of 2017 (PIL)
Santosh Kumar Sahoo and Ors. .... Petitioners
Mr. Karunakar Rath, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and Ors. .... Opposite Parties
Mr. Iswar Mohanty, AGA
CORAM:
THE CHIEF JUSTICE
DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI
ORDER
26.07.2022
Order No.
6. 1. The grievance of the present petitioners is about construction of a
shopping market complex in Balasore Town which according to the
petitioners would cause obstruction on the public road preventing
easy ingress and egress for the public towards Balasore Railway
Station.
2. While directing to issue notice in the present petition on 11th
October, 2017, an interim order was passed staying further
construction of the market complex.
3. In response to the notice issued, a counter affidavit has been filed
by Balasore Municipality on 3rd November, 2017 where inter alia it
has been stated in paragraphs 4 and 8 as under:
"4. That the Municipality has tried its level best to
provide alternative livelihood measures for the
evicted street vendors. This Municipality constructed
the market complex near the main station Road over
plot No- 642 part Khata No- 407, Kisam- Nayan Jodi
and plot No- 644 part Khata No- 407, Kisam- Nayan
Jodi, Mouza Bhaskarganj, unit-10 recorded in favour
of Balasore Municipality for the rehabilitation of the
evicted street venders. The width of place was
considered and it will not create any inconvience for
ingress and outgress of public where market place is
under construction over a portion of Nayanjori (road
side land). It will also prevent the encroachment of
such land for use of land grabbers in the garb of
street vending.
Since this Municipality has constructed the
market complex only to rehabilitee the evicted street
vendors on a piece of available land it has not
violated any of the provisions of law.
Xx xx xx xx xx
8. That in reply to paragraph-7 of the writ petition, it
is respectively submitted that the Municipality have
already stopped the construction works since about
one month ago after receiving the orders of
Collector-cum- District Magistrate, Balasore.
It is worthwhile to mention here that this
Municipality have not constructed the shop rooms all
of a sudden as alleged. Regarding such construction,
an advertisement for 'e' Tender call notice No- 5631/
dt.11.11.2016 was published in the daily news paper,
The Dharitri & The Pragatibadi on 15.11.2016. If
there was any complain/ objection regarding
construction of such shop rooms, the petitioners
could have raised their objection at that time by
which the Municipality could have got sufficient
time to take decision in this score."
4. For the last five years, no rejoinder affidavit has been filed to
contradict the above averments made in the counter affidavit.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners points out how the market
complex remains half constructed on account of the interim order of
this Court. In fact because of stoppage of construction work some
antisocials have forcefully occupied the structure.
6. In view of the above clarification on affidavit by the Balasore
Municipality as regards the factual position, which has not been
contradicted, this Court finds that there is no justification for
continuance of the interim order passed by this Court.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioners refers to the judgment passed
by this Court on 23rd August, 2021 in W.P.(C) Nos.2376 and 8991
of 2021 which concerned the relocation and rehabilitation of
shopkeepers operating under the Flyover Bridge at Balasore. That is
an independent issue which has nothing to do with the construction
of the shopping market complex. This Court feels no reason as to
why rehabilitation/ and resettlement in terms of the judgment of this
Court passed in W.P.(C) Nos.2376 and 8991 of 2021 should
prevent the construction of the above shopping market complex.
8. Consequently, this Court finds no merit in the present petition.
9. The writ petition is dismissed. The interim order passed earlier
stands vacated.
(Dr. S. Muralidhar)
Chief Justice
(Dr. S.K. Panigrahi)
Judge
B. Jhankar
