Tillotama Mohanty & Another vs State Of Odisha & Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 13520 Ori

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                                     W.P. (C) No.16286 of 2023

            Tillotama Mohanty & Another                 ....              Petitioners
                                                       Mr. D.Chatterjee, Advocate


                                            -Versus-


            State of Odisha & Others                    ....      Opposite Parties
                                                             Mr. P.K.Rout, AGA
                                          Mr. A. Mishra, Advocate for O.P. No.4


                      CORAM:
                      MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK


                                           ORDER

01.11.2023 Order No.

05. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Rout, learned AGA for the State as well as Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for opposite party No.4.

2. Mr. Rout, learned AGA for the State submits that since illegally the settlement was allowed, it was later cancelled by opposite party No. 3 which is in respect of the schedule land recorded as 'Rasta'.

3. Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for opposite party No.4 alleges fraud to have been perpetuated while obtaining the lease in respect of the land in question which was subsequently detected and the RoR has been corrected in the meanwhile pursuant to the Court's order dated 15th March, 2023 in W.P.(C) (PIL) No. 14724 of 2016. Furthermore, a decision has been referred to by Mr. Mishra in the case of Mr. Surendra Rathore

Vrs. State of M.P. & others decided in Writ Petition No. 12282 of 2023 and disposed of on 30th May, 2023 stating that since the fraud is clear and apparent, cancellation of lease cannot be objected to and opposed on the ground of absence of participation of the petitioner, as in such cases, principle of Useless Formality Theory applies. One more judgment in case of Ram Kumar Vrs. State of U.P. & others reported in 2022 Live Law (SC) 806 is placed reliance on by Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for opposite party No.4 which is on the principle to be followed in case of fraud being alleged and proved prima facie. Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for opposite party No.4 lastly submits that the petitioner falsely claimed and represented the authority concerned in Encroachment Case No.171 of 2000 while seeking settlement of the schedule land by way of a lease which has been established with the evidence collected and while claiming so, he refers to the annexures to I.A. No. 10179 of 2023.

4. In such view of the matter, considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties, the Court is inclined to direct the petitioners to file an affidavit in response to Annexure A/4 series to I.A. No. 10179 of 2023 and to the contention of Mr. Rout, learned AGA for the State as well as Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for opposite party No.4 which is based on fraud.

5. List this matter on 22nd November, 2023 for final hearing and orders. In the meantime, the affidavit shall be filed by the learned counsel for the petitioners, copies of which shall be served on the State as well as Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for opposite party No.4 well in advance.

6. Interim order passed by this Court shall remain in force till the next date of listing.

(R.K.Pattanaik) Judge

KABITA

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: KABITARANI MAJHI Reason: Authentication Location: OHC, CTC