Shyamsundar Sahu vs Commissioner Endowment
2022 Latest Caselaw 6233 Ori

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                                WP(C) No.8185 of 2019
                                (Through Hybrid mode)

            Shyamsundar Sahu                          ....                 Petitioner

                                                       Mr. J. J. Mohanty, Advocate

                                           -versus-


            Commissioner Endowment, BBSR              ....           Opposite Parties
            and others

                                              Mr. A. K. Nath, Advocate for O.P.1

                                                           Mr. A. K. Nanda, AGA
            CORAM:
            JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA
            JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

                                     ORDER

Order No.                           01.11.2022


  03.       1.      Mr. Mohanty, learned senior advocate appears on behalf of

petitioner and submits, there has been judgment dated 12th April,

2018, whereby Court of the Commissioner had held that judgment

debtor needed to be evicted. The Collector, Puri has not acted

pursuant thereto.

2. Mr. Sharma, learned advocate, Additional Government

Advocate appears on behalf of State and points out that judgment

debtor has not been made party in the writ petition.

// 2 //

3. Two paragraphs from the judgment are extracted and

reproduced below.

"Thus, considering the unchallenged testimony of the petitioner and the document placed on record I may say that possession of schedule land by O.P. is against the spirit of law, and therefore he needs eviction.

Accordingly, the petition filed U/S.25 of the O.H.R.E. Act is allowed. Issue requisition to the Collector, Puri for eviction of O.P. from the case land and to give delivery possession of the same to the case deity through its Authorised Agent."

4. On query from Court parties have not been able to show any

appeal was preferred from the judgment. In the circumstances,

opposite party no.2 is directed to initiate or if already initiated,

proceed with the evicting judgment debtor. The requisition made by

the judgment is to be complied with within three months from

communication of this order to said opposite party.

5. The writ petition is disposed of.

( Arindam Sinha ) Judge

( S. K. Mishra ) Judge Prasant