Orissa High Court
Rabindra Kumar Jena vs State Of Odisha And Others .... Opposite ... on 4 November, 2024
Author: R.K. Pattanaik
Bench: R.K. Pattanaik
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.26646 of 2024
Rabindra Kumar Jena .... Petitioner
Mr. S.P. Dash, Advocate
-Versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opposite Parties
Mr. P.K. Mohanty, ASC
CORAM:
MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK
ORDER
04.11.2024
Order No.
01. 1. Heard Mr. Dash, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.
Mohanty, learned ASC for the State.
2. No notice is issued to opposite party No.6 as the matter is
disposed of at the stage of admission considering the grievance of
the petitioner.
3. Instant writ petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the
impugned demarcation notice under Annexure-3 series and to direct
opposite party No.3 to consider the objection filed by him as per
the guidelines of the Government as at Annexure-5 on the grounds
stated.
4. Mr. Dash, learned counsel for the petitioner refers to copy
of the judgment in C.S. No.20 of 2014 i.e. Annexure-1 and also of
the application in E.C. No.01 of 2018 and submits that despite such
a decree in respect of the case land, notices have been issued to the
petitioner for demarcation, which is at the instance of opposite
party No.6 and despite an objection filed to the same in the
meantime, it has not been disposed of, hence, therefore, necessary
direction may perhaps be issued to opposite party No.3 in that
regard.
5. Recorded the submission of Mr. Mohanty, learned ASC for
the State.
6. Gone through the guidelines of the Government at
Annexure-5, according to which, demarcation shall not be
conducted in case, there is any prohibitory/injunction orders by a
Court of competent jurisdiction in respect of a suit land. The
contention of the petitioner is that despite an objection filed by
him, opposite party No.3 is not taking up hearing of the same,
inasmuch as, notice under Annexure-3 series is not legally tenable in
view of the guidelines of the Government and decree in C.S. No.20
of 2014.
7. Having regard to the facts pleaded on record and
submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, which is with
reference to the guidelines of the Government i.e. Annexure-5 and
as in the meantime, an objection is filed by the petitioner, the Court
is inclined to direct opposite party No.3 to immediately attend to
the same and pass necessary order according to law taking into
account the fact that a judgment and decree in C.S. No. 20 of 2014
in respect of the case land is in favour of the petitioner with the
execution being levied in the meantime pending since 2018.
8. Accordingly, it is ordered.
9. In the result, the writ petition stands disposed of with the
direction as aforesaid. It is further directed that opposite party No.3
shall immediately consider and examine the objection filed by the
petitioner and thereafter, to proceed and to pass necessary order
thereon as per and in accordance with law providing reasonable
opportunity of hearing to him as well as opposite party No.6
followed by any such order at the earliest preferably within a period
of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
10. Urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per rules.
(R.K. Pattanaik)
Judge
Balaram
Designation: Personal Assistant
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
