Orissa High Court
Birabar Sahoo vs State Of Odisha And Others on 6 July, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.19509 of 2023
Birabar Sahoo .... Petitioner
Mr. Srinivas Mohanty, Advocate
-Versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opposite Parties
Mr. A.K. Sharma, Advocate
(Addl. Government Advocate)
CORAM:
JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA
JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA
ORDER
06.07.2023
Order No.
02. 1. Mr. Mohanty, learned advocate appears on behalf of
petitioner and submits, his client is in occupation of some parts
of the land being subject matter of permission granted to the
institution to sell. The permission was granted by the
Commissioner on judgment dated 7th May, 2012 in O.A. Case
no.47 of 2002. There was appeal preferred against the judgment,
disposed by order dated 3rd November, 2018 by the then Hon'ble
Minister. Pursuant to the order in appeal, impugned order dated
27th March, 2023 was made by the Commissioner purportedly
under section 19-C in Odisha Hindu Religious Endowments Act,
1951.
2. He submits, first ground of challenge is that provisions in
section 19-C do not apply as the case was initiated in year, 2002.
It was dealt with by said judgment dated 7th May, 2012 under the
existing law and subsequent amendment cannot be read as
incorporated in the judgment by modification in appeal.
3. Mr. Sharma, learned advocate, Additional Government
Advocate appears on behalf of State and submits, the provision
stands attracted as appellate order was made on 3rd November,
2018 and judgment dated 7th May, 2012 merges in it. He submits
further, the appellate order was passed on 3rd November, 2018,
which petitioner did not challenge. Petitioner moving by the writ
petition is therefore on delay and should not be entertained.
4. Ms. Naidu, learned advocate appears on behalf of the
Commissioner.
5. Petitioner has come up against order dated 27th March,
2023 made in O.A. Case no.47 of 2002. We take it impugned
order was passed to give effect to the appellate order made in
year, 2018. In giving effect as on 27th March, 2023, petitioner
challenged the same by presenting the writ petition on 22nd June,
2023. The ground of delay is not good ground at all.
6. We find from appellate order dated 3rd November, 2018
there was no interference with the judgment. On the contrary, it
was confirmed. Two paragraphs from the appellate order are
reproduced below.
"After hearing the appellants and the respondents present
and the representative on behalf of the respondent No.1
and the Asst. Law officer on behalf of the Commissioner of
Endowments and perusal of the copy of the order
dt.07.05.2012 passed by the Commissioner of Endowments
along with the case record, it appears that the view taken
by the Commissioner of Endowments is reasonable.
xxx xxx xxx xxx
The conduct of auction, in case of the State Govt. does
not desire to purchase the case land and the manner of
deposit of the sale proceeds as order by the Commissioner
of Endowments are also confirmed."
7. Opposite parties will be heard on firstly, whether
provision in section 19-C can apply to judgment dated 7th May,
2012, confirmed in appeal. Secondly, whether State will
participate in the auction of sub-divided plots as directed by the
judgment. For the purpose, State will file counter by 28th July,
2023. Prayer for extension of time will not be made since more
than 3 weeks are being granted. Petitioner may file rejoinder, to
be accepted on adjourned date upon advance copy served.
8. Issue notice along with this order to opposite party nos. 3
and 4 by registered/speed post with A.D. Petitioner will put in
requisites.
9. List on 7th August, 2023 along with WP(C) no.19822 of
2023.
10. Status quo be maintained till next date of hearing.
(Arindam Sinha)
Judge
(S. K. Mishra)
Judge
Signature Not Verified
PCD
Digitally Signed
Signed by: PADMA CHARAN DASH
Reason: Authentication
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
Date: 06-Jul-2023 19:07:20
