Orissa High Court
Digambar Behera (Dead) And Others vs Harichandan Behera (Dead) & Others ... ... on 11 August, 2025
ORISSA HIGH COURT : CUTTACK
WP(C) No.19903 of 2022
An application under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of
India.
***
Digambar Behera (dead) and others .......... Petitioners
-VERSUS-
Harichandan Behera (dead) & others ... Opposite Parties
Counsel appeared for the parties:
For the Petitioners : Mr.A.N.Routray, Advocate
For the Opposite Parties : Mr.B.Mohapatra,Advocate
(for the O.P. Nos.1 to 7)
Mr.T.Kumar, ASC
(For the O.P. Nos.7 and 8)
P R E S E N T:
HONOURABLE
MR. JUSTICE ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA
Date of Hearing: 11.08.2025 :: Date of Judgment : 11.08.2025
J UDGMENT
ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA, J.--
1. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the Petitioners
praying for quashing the impugned order dated 10.05.2022
(Annexure-4) passed under Section 15(b) of the OSS Act, 1958 by
the Member, Board of Revenue, Odisha, Cuttack (O.P.No.8).
2. Heard from the learned counsel for the Petitioners, the
learned counsel for the O.P. Nos.1 to 7 and the learned ASC for
the O.P. Nos.8 and 9.
3. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the
Petitioners submitted that, the case land vide Hal Plot No.897
corresponds to Sabik Plot No.726/1639 under Sabik Khata
No.345. The Hal R.o.R. of the case land has been prepared
erroneously in the name of the O.P. Nos.1 to 7, though, the same
corresponds to Sabik Khata No.345 and the Sabik Khata No.345
was recorded in the name of the predecessor of the Petitioners.
For which, they (petitioners) are the owners of the case land. The
O.P. Nos.1 to 7 are not the owners of the same. The learned
counsel for the Petitioners also fairly submitted that, the Hal Plot
No.897 under Hal Khata No.1013, Ac.0.144 decimals (which is
not the case land) has been recorded erroneously in the name of
the Petitioners. The said Hal Plot No.897 corresponds to Sabik
Plot No.1638, which was recorded in the Sabik Settlement in the
name of the predecessor of the O.P. Nos.1 to 7. So, in fact, the
O.P. Nos.1 to 7 are the owners of Hal Plot No.897, which has
been erroneously recorded in the name of the Petitioners.
So, according to the learned counsel for the Petitioners,
during settlement operation, the R.o.R of the case land has been
erroneously prepared in favour of the O.P. Nos.1 to 7 and the
land of the O.P. Nos.1 to 7 i.e. Plot No.897 has been erroneously
recorded in the name of the Petitioners. Therefore, the Petitioners
are the owners of the case land vide Hal Plot No.897, Ac.0.144
decimals, whereas, the O.P. Nos.1 to 7 are the owners of Hal Plot
No.890 Ac.0.141 decimals.
To which, the learned counsel for the O.P. Nos.1 to 7
objected contending that, Hal Plot No.890 and Hal Plot No.897
were purchased by the predecessor of the Parties from one
common vendor and during the course of delivery of possession
of their respective purchased properties involving the case land
and Plot No.890, the possession thereof was delivered alternating
the places indicated in their respective sale deeds.
4. According to the above rival contentions of the learned
counsels of both the sides, the real matters in dispute between
the parties involves two plots i.e. Hal Plot Nos.897 and Hal Plot
No.890. Therefore, a thorough adjudication is required taking
into account to the corresponding documents relating to Hal Plot
Nos.897 and 890 and unless the records of the above two plots
are taken into account, the controversies/disputes between the
Parties cannot be finally adjudicated for all times to come.
5. The learned counsel for the O.P. Nos. 1 to 7 also submitted
that, they have already constructed their residential houses over
the case land vide Plot No.897 and they are residing in the same
with their family members.
To which, the learned counsel for the Petitioners seriously
disputed/denied contending that, the O.P. Nos.1 to 7 in their
written argument before the O.P. No.8 has illegally stated that,
the Petitioners are the trespasser of the case land.
6. When, it came out from the submissions of the learned
counsels of both the sides that, the matters in dispute between
the parties relates to two Plots vide Hal Plot No.897 and Hal Plot
No.890, then at this juncture, the corresponding documents of
the above both plots are required to be considered.
7. As per the discussions and observations made above, when
it is held that, for adjudication of the real controversies/disputes
between the Parties, both the Hal Plots vide Plot Nos.897 and 890
are required to involved in the lis between the Parties and the
corresponding documents of the above both the Plots are required
to be considered and when the impugned order as per Annexure-
4 has been passed only in respect of one Plot vide Hal Plot
No.897, then at this juncture, the impugned order vide
Annexure-4 passed by the Member, Board of Revenue, Odisha,
Cuttack (O.P.No.8) cannot be sustainable under law. Therefore,
the impugned order vide Annexure-4 is liable to be quashed.
8. Hence, the writ petition filed by the Petitioners is allowed.
9. The impugned order dated 10.05.2022 vide Annexure-4
passed by the Member, Board of Revenue, Odisha, Cuttack
(O.P.No.8) under Section 15(b) of the OSS Act, 1958 is quashed
and the said matter vide R.P. Case No.897 of 2015 is remitted
back to the O.P. No.8 to decide the same afresh directing the
Parties to include/involve Hal Plot No.890 in R.P. Case No.897 of
2015 with Hal Plot No.897 for proper adjudication of the said R.P.
Case No.897 of 2015 between the Parties as per law after giving
opportunity of being heard to the Parties as expeditiously as
possible.
10. The Parties are directed to appear before the Member, Board
of Revenue, Odisha, Cuttack (O.P.No.8) on dated 29.08.2025 for
the purpose of receiving the directions of the O.P. No.8 as to
further proceeding of the said R.P. Case No.897 of 2015.
11. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of finally.
(ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA)
JUDGE
High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
11.08.2025// Binayak Sahoo
Jr. Stenographer
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
