Orissa High Court
Gyana Ranjan Sahoo And vs State Of Odisha And .... Opp. Parties on 22 April, 2025
Author: S.K. Sahoo
Bench: S.K. Sahoo
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.10043 of 2025
Gyana Ranjan Sahoo and .... Petitioners
others
Mr. Bibekananda Bhuyan,
Senior Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and .... Opp. Parties
others
Mr. Aurobinda Mohanty, ASC
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. S. MISHRA
ORDER
Order No. 22.04.2025
02. This matter is taken up through Hybrid
arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode).
This writ petition has been filed by the
petitioners Gyana Ranjan Sahoo and others
challenging the notice dated 15.01.2025 issued by the
Tahasildar, Tangi, Choudwar in Lease Misc. Case
No.01 of 2025 inviting objection from all concerned
regarding de-reservation of the land appertaining to
Mouza-Sardola, Khata No.515 (reserve), Plot Nos.
1487 and 1479, Kissam-Gochar, Area Ac.1.12 dec.
and Ac.4.82 dec.
Mr. Bhuyan, learned Senior Advocate appearing
for the petitioners contended that the definition of the
"Collector" occurring in 2(a) of the Odisha
Government Land Settlement Act, 1962 (for short
„OGLS Act‟) includes an Additional District Magistrate.
Section 3-A of the OGLS Act provides that the
Government by notification in the Official Gazette will
authorize any officer, not below the rank of a Collector
to de-reserve any land, which also includes any
Government land recorded as „Gochar‟. He further
submits that a Notification No.6172-GE (GL) 3/74
dated 29.01.1974 has been issued by the Revenue
Department wherein it has been specified that the
State Government in exercise of the powers conferred
under Section 3-A of the OGLS Act has authorized all
the Collectors of the State to de-reserve any land
which has been reserved under Clause (a) of Section 3
or any portion thereof within the district under their
respective jurisdiction.
Learned Senior Advocate has placed Rule 4 of
the Odisha Government Land Settlement Rules, 1983
(hereinafter „1983 Rules‟), which deals with de-
reservation principles and argued that the authorized
Collector has to invite objection which is to be filed
before the concerned Tahasildar and after objections
are received, the Tahasildar shall hear the parties and
forward his recommendation to the authorized
Collector for orders. He further submits that from
Annexure-5, it appears that Lease Misc. Case No.01 of
2025 has been initiated by the Tahasildar, Tangi,
Choudwar and he has issued a notice dated
15.01.2025 inviting objections which is not in
consonance with provisions of OGLS Act and 1983
Rules. However, he fairly submits that after issuance
of such notice, the petitioners have filed their
objection under Annexure-6 and then notice has been
issued to them under Annexure-9 to appear on
04.03.2025 for hearing by the Tahasildar, Tangi,
Choudwar. On 04.03.2025, no hearing took place, for
which another objection has been submitted by the
petitioners under Annexure-10, but no final decision
has been taken on the objection.
Mr. Mohanty, learned Additional Standing
Counsel for the State submits that on 04.03.2025
itself the hearing has been concluded and
recommendation was forwarded to the Deputy
Collector, Revenue Collectorate, Cuttack who in turn
returned the de-reservation case record to the
Tahasildar, Tangi, Choudwar for the purpose of a final
order narrating all the details with modified trace map
and to re-submit the case record through Sub-
Collector, Cuttack for taking necessary action.
Relevant would be to reproduce the entire text of the
said order:
"To
The Tahasildar, Tangi-Choudwar
Sub: Return of de-reservation case record
bearing No.01/2025 of Mouza-Sardola of
Tangi Choudwar Tahasil.
Ref: Letter no. 3757 dtd. 18.03.2025 of Sub-
collector, Cuttack, Sadar under Memo to your
address.
Sir,
With reference to the letter on the
subject cited above, I am directed to say that
after verification of the de-reservation
proposal for alienation of Ac. 5.94 dec. of land
in favour of Panchayati Raj & Drinking Water
Department for the purpose of construction of
Mini Stadium a Village Sardola under your
Tahasil the following observation is found
which needs to be complied before processing
the de-reservation proposal as follows: -
1. In the order sheet dtd. 13.03.2025
attached in the case record the Tahasildar,
Tangi Choudwar has stated that an objection
had been received from Ramesh Chandra
Sahu and Others in response to the general
proclamation notice and the same was
disposed on the date of hearing i.e. on dtd.
04.03.2025 in presence of some petitioner on
the basis of "there is surplus Gochar land
available in the said Mouza as per the
effective area statement given by the R.I.
concerned and the petition filed is not
sustainable in the eyes of law." But the
written judgment with the signature (witness)
of the petitioners is not attached in the case
record which may be attached/clarified.
2. Fresh trace maps in trace cloth instead of
trace paper mentioning the details of the
proposed land well connected by road and the
adjacent lands in quadruplicate should be
attached in the proceeding.
3. The Tahasildar has mentioned in his orders
as well as in the field visit memorandum that
the applied land was non-Forest Kissam as on
25.10.1980 but no hal-sabik co-relation has
been made or document in this connection
has been attached in the case record.
In returning herewith the De-reservation case
No.01/2025, I am directed request you to
verify the matter and make a final order
narrating all the details with modified trace
map and re-submit the case record through
Sub-Collector, Cuttack, for taking further
action at this end.
Receipt of the above case record may please
be acknowledged.
Yours faithfully,
Dy. Collector, Revenue
Collectorate, Cuttack"
Reading of the letter/order of Dy. Collector,
Revenue, Collectorate, Cuttack, it reveals that the
matter is still under the active consideration and
awaiting final order by the Competent Authority. At
this stage, we are not inclined to examine the legal
points raised by learned Senior Advocate challenging
the impugned notice. It is left open for the petitioners
to urge all the points as has been taken in this petition
including the highlighted legal issues before the
Competent Authority at the time of hearing. It is
expected that the Authority Concerned under
provisions of OGLS Act and 1983 Rules shall consider
the same and pass a speaking order in accordance
with law.
With the aforementioned observations, the Writ
Petition is disposed of.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
( S. S. Mishra)
Judge
Swarna/Ashok
Signed by: ASHOK KUMAR JAGADEB MOHAPATRA
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 23-Apr-2025 19:47:09
