Orissa High Court
Sri Alaranath Deb Bije vs State Of Odisha And Others on 5 May, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.13815 of 2023
Sri Alaranath Deb Bije, Alarpur .... Petitioner
Mr. S. Mishra, Advocate
-Versus-
State of Odisha and Others .... Opposite Parties
Ms. S. Mishra, ASC
CORAM:
MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK
ORDER
05.05.2023
Order No.
01. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Mishra,
learned ASC for the State-opposite party Nos.1 to 3.
2. No notice need be issued to opposite party No.4
considering the fact that the matter is disposed of at the stage of
admission.
3. Instant writ petition is filed by the petitioner for a direction
to the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar-opposite party No.2 to initiate
action against encroachers and remove the encroachment in respect
of the schedule land which stands recorded in the name of Shree
Alarnath Dev by initiating eviction proceeding within a stipulated
period and also to hand over possession of it in favour of the deity
Marfatdar.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the title of
the schedule land stands recorded with the petitioner deity by virtue
of a judgment and decree dated 22nd November, 2014 in CS
No.45/381 of 2013-2010 and while contending so, cites a copy of
the said judgment as at Annexure-3. It is further submitted that
action was initiated by Sub-Collector, Puri under Annexure-5 and in
that connection, opposite party No.2 issued a notice under
Annexure-7 for the encroachers to appear and to show cause in
view of the decree in CS No. 45/381 of 2013-2010 of the court of
learned Additional Civil Judge (S.D.), Puri. Referring to the
Annexure-8, it is further submitted that even the Endowment
Authority has intimated opposite party No.2 to take steps for
implementation of the judgment and decree in CS No. 45/381 of
2013-2010 and order dated 26th September, 2017 by the Revenue
Divisional Commissioner, Cuttack besides earlier order dated 10th
July, 2018 of the Tahasildar, Brahmagiri. Hence, according to the
learned counsel for the petitioner, opposite party No.2 should be
directed to take immediate measures to ensure removal of
encroachment and eviction of the alleged encroachers from the
schedule land.
5. Ms. Mishra, learned ASC for the State-opposite party Nos.1
to 3 submits that since there is a decree, if at all encroachment is to
be removed and cleared, the petitioner should approach the civil
court. In response to the above, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that at least action which has been initiated vide Annexure-7
should be brought to a logical end and to that extent, necessary
direction may be issued by the Court.
6. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and submissions of
learned counsel for the respective parties, the Court is of the view
that since opposite party No.2 has summoned the alleged
encroacher vide Annexure-7, the action which has been initiated
should be accomplished in accordance with law unless there is no
legal impediment.
7. Accordingly, it is ordered.
8. In the result, the writ petition stands disposed of in the
above terms.
9. A certified copy of this order be granted as per rules.
(R.K. Pattanaik)
Judge
THAKURD Digitally signed by
THAKURDAS TUDU
AS TUDU Date: 2023.05.06
15:47:55 +05'30'
Tudu
