Orissa High Court
Sarojini Panda vs Revenue And Disaster Management on 17 November, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WANos.139, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192,
193, 194, 195, 196, 197 and 198 of 2019
WA No.139 of 2019
Sarojini Panda .... Appellant
-versus-
Revenue and Disaster Management
Department and Others ... Respondents
WA No.184 of 2019
Sailabala Sahu .... Appellant
-versus-
State of Odisha and Others ... Respondents
WA No.185 of 2019
Jyoshnamayee Das .... Appellant
-versus-
State of Odisha and Others ... Respondents
WA No. 186 of 2019
Bishnupriya Das .... Appellant
-versus-
State of Odisha and Others ... Respondents
WA No. 187 of 2019
Jyoshnamayee Das .... Appellant
-versus-
State of Odisha and Others Respondents
WA Nos. 139, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191,
192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197 and 198 of 2019 Page 1 of 9
WA No. 188 of 2019
Reenarani Mallik .... Appellant
-versus-
State of Odisha and Others Respondents
WA No. 189 of 2019
Geetanjali Mishra .... Appellant
-versus-
State of Odisha and Others Respondents
WA No. 190 of 2019
Surendra Kumar Mahapatra .... Appellant
-versus-
State of Odisha and Others Respondents
WA No. 191 of 2019
KanakalataMallik .... Appellant
-versus-
State of Odisha and Others Respondents
WA No. 192 of 2019
Haraprasad Mishra .... Appellant
-versus-
State of Odisha and Others Respondents
WA No. 193 of 2019
Chandrasekhar Kar .... Appellant
-versus-
State of Odisha and Others Respondents
WA Nos. 139, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191,
192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197 and 198 of 2019 Page 2 of 9
WA No. 194 of 2019
Haraprasad Mishra .... Appellant
-versus-
State of Odisha and Others Respondents
WA No. 195 of 2019
Jyotirmayee Das .... Appellant
-versus-
State of Odisha and Others Respondents
WA No. 196 of 2019
Jyoshnamayee Das and Another .... Appellants
-versus-
State of Odisha and Others Respondents
WA No. 197 of 2019
Hrudananda Kar .... Appellant
-versus-
State of Odisha and Others Respondents
AND
WA No. 198 of 2019
Sailabala Sahu .... Appellant
-versus-
State of Odisha and Others Respondents
Advocates, appeared in these cases:
For Appellant(s) : Ms. Deepali Mohapatra, Advocate
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ishwar Mohanty
Addl. Standing Counsel
WA Nos. 139, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191,
192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197 and 198 of 2019 Page 3 of 9
CORAM:
THE CHIEF JUSTICE
JUSTICE M.S. RAMAN
JUDGMENT
17.11.2022
Dr. S. Muralidhar, CJ.
1. All these writ appeals arise out of a common set of facts and are
accordingly being disposed of by this common judgment.
2. W.A. No.139 of 2019 is directed against an order dated 25th
February, 2019 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing
Writ Petition (Civil) No.926 of 2019 filed by the Appellant. The
remaining writ appeals in this batch are directed against a
common order dated 26th March, 2019 passed by the learned
Single Judge in the corresponding writ petitions again dismissing
them in the same terms as the order dated 25th February, 2019 in
W.P.(C) No.926 of 2019.
3. In all the writ petitions, the challenge was to the orders passed
by the Settlement Officer (SO), Cuttack in different appeal cases
pursuant to an earlier order of the learned Single Judge in the first
round of writ petitions.
4. The background facts are that each of the present Appellants
purchased different plots of land in Mouza Gothapatna under
Bhubaneswar Tahasil from vendors in whose favour apparently
there were valid leases. The purchases took place under registered
sale deeds. As a result of the settlement operation that commenced
WA Nos. 139, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191,
in the area and the entries were made in the Records of Rights
(RoR) in favour of the legal representatives of the original lessees.
However, pursuant to suo motu cases initiated by the Asst.
Settlement Officer, directions were issued on 30th July, 2013 to
record the RoR in the name of the Government. The case of the
Appellants is that this was done without notice to any of them.
5. This then led to be first round of writ petitions by these
Appellants before this Court. In one such writ petitions i.e.
W.P.(C) No.3515 of 2017 filed by the Appellant in W.A. No.139
of 2019 the following order was passed by the learned Single
Judge on 2nd May, 2017:
"Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned Addl. Standing Counsel.
In this case, the petitioner, who has purchased
land from the lease-holder, has assailed the order
passed by the opposite party No.5 in Rent Case
No.6276/2012 dated 30.07.2013 directing that the
land measuring an area Ac 0.050 decimals, be
recorded in the name of State Government. It is
apparent that in this case lease were granted by
the State Government in favour of different
persons from whom the present petitioner has
purchased the land in question through a valid
registered sale deed upon passing of
consolidation.
However, it is borne out that a single land case
has been initiated with respect to all the land and
different persons have been affected by such an
order. In that rent case, neither the lease holders
nor their purchasers have been made parties and
in some cases, lease holders are dead. Without
passing any order to implead their legal heirs,
WA Nos. 139, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191,
order has been passed by the learned Assistant
Settlement Officer, Bhubaneswar. In that view of
the matter, this Court is of the opinion that the
order passed by the learned Assistant Settlement
Officer is not only illegal but also it violates the
principles of natural justice. Since no notice has
been issued to any of the persons affected, the
order passed by the Assistant Settlement Officer is
nullity. Hence, this Court has no hesitation to
quash the order impugned in the case.
Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The
order dated 30.07.2013 passed by the opposite
party No.5 in Rent Case No.6276/2012 is hereby
quashed. The Petitioner is directed to appear
before the learned Settlement Officer, Cuttack
(opposite party No.3) on 17.05.2017 to put forth
her grievances and the learned Settlement Officer,
if he so thinks it proper, may start a separate case
on the land allegedly in possessing of each of the
persons and after affording reasonable opportunity
of hearing to the petitioner and adducing such
evidence as may be desired by the petitioner, shall
dispose of the case by reasoned order as
expeditiously as possible.
The writ petitions are disposed of."
6. Pursuant to the aforementioned order and similar orders passed
in the writ petitions filed by the Appellants in the companion
appeals, the matter once again went before the SO, Cuttack. On
19th September, 2018 identical orders were passed by the SO in
each of the appeals of the present Appellants in which, after
quoting the operative portion of the order dated 2nd May, 2017 of
the learned Single Judge, the Settlement Officer recorded as
under:
WA Nos. 139, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191,
"The Petitioner is directed to appear before the
learned Settlement Officer, Cuttack (opposite
party No.3) on 17.05.2017 to put forth her
grievances and the learned Settlement Officer,
if he so thinks it proper, may start a separate
case on the land allegedly in possession of each
of the persons and after affording reasonable
opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and
adducing such evidence as may be desired by
the petitioner, shall dispose of the case by
reasoned order as expeditiously s possible.
In the present case, it is ascertained that the
final publication of the village -Gothapatna has
already been made. As such the Settlement
Authority becomes "functus officio" once the
R.O.R. including map of concerned village are
finally published.
The Government pleader vide his letter dated
21.08.2017 has also offered his reasoned
opinion in the matter stating that the Settlement
Officer becomes "functus officio" to entertain
any appeal after final publication of R.O.Rs
Therefore, the appeal case is not maintainable
and hereby disallowed. It isopen to appellant to
seek relief in appropriate forum.
This order is pronounced on 19th September,
2018 in the Open Court today."
7. It must be noted at this stage that the final RoR was, as pleaded
in para 8 of the writ appeal i.e. W.A. No.139 of 2019 published on
30th December, 2013 in the name of the Government in respect of
each of the plots in question. This averment has not been denied
by the State despite notice having been issued in the present
appeals on 17th May, 2019. Consequently, the Court proceeds on
WA Nos. 139, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191,
the basis that the date of publication of final RoR in the present
case was 30th December, 2013 which was long before the order of
the learned Single Judge.
8. Considering that the order of the learned Single Judge was
passed subsequently on 2nd May, 2017, the SO could not have
declined to entertain the appeal on the ground of having become
functus officio, as a result of the publication of the final RoR.
This fact was accounted for when the learned Single Judge passed
the order dated 2nd May, 2017 and it was, therefore, incumbent
upon the SO to have considered the appeal notwithstanding that
the final RoR may have been published. The implication of the
order dated 2nd May, 2017 of the learned Single Judge was that
even if a final RoR had been published showing the Government
to be the owner of the land in question that was subject to the
outcome of the appeal that was directed by the learned Single
Judge to be heard afresh by the SO. Consequently, the order dated
19th September, 2018 of the SO, declining to entertain the appeals,
was in the teeth of the order dated 2nd May, 2017 of the learned
Single Judge and, therefore, unsustainable in law.
9. Consequently, the Court has no hesitation in setting aside the
order dated 19th September, 2018 of the SO in each of the appeals
filed by the present Appellants and remands all the appeals back
to the SO for being heard afresh on merits pursuant to the remand
order dated 2nd May, 2017 of the learned Single Judge in the
corresponding writ petitions in the first round. As a result, the
WA Nos. 139, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191,
impugned orders of the learned Single Judge in the writ petitions
out of which the present writ appeals arise are also hereby set
aside.
10. The appeals before the SO by the present Appellants will now
be listed for directions before the SO on 9th January, 2023 on
which date each of the Appellants will appear either in person or
through counsel. The SO is then requested to proceed with the
appeals on merits and dispose them of as expeditiously as
possible. Till disposal of such appeals, status quo as of date shall
be maintained.
11. The writ appeals are disposed of in the above terms. An urgent
certified copy of this order be issued as per rules.
(S. Muralidhar)
Chief Justice
(M.S. Raman)
Judge
S.K.Jena/Secy.
WA Nos. 139, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191,
