[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Bijayketan Sahoo vs State Of Odisha & Ors. .... Opposite ... on 29 November, 2025
Author: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi
Bench: Sanjeeb K Panigrahi
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR
Reason: Authentication
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
Date: 04-Dec-2025 18:50:39
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.21192 of 2025
along with
CONTC No.3214 of 2025
(In the matters of petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India, 1950).
(In W.P.(C) No.21192 of 2025)
Bijayketan Sahoo .... Petitioner(s)
-versus-
State of Odisha & Ors. .... Opposite Party(s)
Advocates appeared in the case through Hybrid Mode:
For Petitioner (s) : Mr. Pradipta Ku. Mohanty, Sr. Adv.
Along with associates
-versus-
For Opp. Party(s) : Mr. Rajdeep Pradhan, ASC
Ms. Saswati Morarana, Adv.
(In CONTC No.3214 of 2025)
Mahesh Kumar Sahu .... Petitioner(s)
-versus-
Arjya Kumar Sarbadaman, Tahasildar, .... Opposite Party(s)
Ranpur, Nayagarh
Advocates appeared in the case through Hybrid Mode:
For Petitioner (s) : Ms. Saswati Morarana, Adv
-versus-
For Opp. Party(s) : Mr. Rajdeep Pradhan, ASC
Page 1 of 13
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: BHABAGRAHI JHANKAR
Reason: Authentication
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
Date: 04-Dec-2025 18:50:39
CORAM:
DR. JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI
DATES OF HEARING:- 06.11.2025
DATE OF JUDGMENT:- 29.11.2025
Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi, J.
1. Since both the writ petition and the contempt petition arise out of
the same factual background and involve the same parties, those
were heard together.
2. The petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition challenging the
issuance of Form-Ka in Encroachment Case No. 315 of 2024-25, the
consequential Form-Kha, and the final notice dated 22.04.2025
issued in the said proceeding.
3. CONTC No. 3214 of 2025 has also been taken up along with the
Writ Petition, wherein the petitioner alleges non-compliance with
certain prior directions of this Court in related encroachment
proceedings.
I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE:
4. Succinctly put, the facts of the case are as follows:
(i) The petitioner and his family members reside in Mouza-Chandpur,
P.O. Ranpur, District Nayagarh. Their residential house stands over
Plot No.1471 under Khata No.450, recorded as homestead in the
name of the petitioner's late father, Narayan Sahoo, and stated to be
in their continuous possession for several decades.
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
(ii) In 2008, certain villagers of Chandpur initiated proceedings under
Section 133 Cr.P.C. before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Nayagarh,
alleging obstruction of a public road adjacent to the petitioner's
homestead. The said proceeding, registered as Crl. Misc. Case No.25
of 2008, culminated in an order dated 07.09.2011 directing removal
of the obstruction. A challenge to the said order in CRLREV No.811
of 2011 was dismissed by this Court on 09.04.2013.
(iii) Thereafter, the petitioner's late father instituted Civil Suit No.20 of
2013 on 16.07.2013 before the court of the learned Additional Civil
Judge (Junior Division), Ranpur seeking a decree of permanent
injunction in respect of Plot No.1471. The suit was decreed on
13.12.2024, restraining the defendants therein from entering upon
the said plot.
(iv) Subsequently, Encroachment Case No.315 of 2024-25 was initiated
under the provisions of the Odisha Prevention of Land
Encroachment Act, 1972. In the said proceeding, Form-Ka was
issued to the petitioner directing him to appear before the
Tahasildar. The petitioner submitted his show-cause reply pursuant
to the said notice.
(v) Form-Kha was thereafter issued on 27.02.2025 directing him to
remove the alleged encroachment within thirty days.
(vi) A final notice dated 22.04.2025 was thereafter issued in continuation
of the proceeding.
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
(vii) The petitioner has filed the present writ petition challenging the
aforesaid orders and notices issued in Encroachment Case No.315 of
2024-25.
(viii) In the meantime, certain villagers sought intervention and also
filed CONTC No.3214 of 2025 alleging non-compliance with earlier
directions issued by this Court in related encroachment matters.
(ix) During the pendency of the present proceedings, this Court, by
order dated 20.08.2025, directed a joint verification of the site to be
conducted in the presence of the petitioner and the local Sarpanch.
In compliance, the Tahasildar filed an affidavit enclosing the
Revenue Inspector's joint verification report and the accompanying
sketch map reflecting the measurements recorded on site.
II. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER:
5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner earnestly made the following
submissions in support of his contentions.
(i) The petitioner submitted that he did not pursue the statutory
remedy of appeal before the Sub-Collector, as the present
proceeding is a continuation of earlier actions already placed before
this Court in W.P.(C) No.14045 of 2021, which was disposed of with
a direction for demarcation and further action in accordance with
law. The petitioner further submitted that, pursuant to the said
direction, the Revenue Inspector, Chandpur conducted a
demarcation and, in his report dated 25.11.2024, recorded that the
petitioner's house stands over Plot No.1471 and that the extension
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
of the semi-circular "taza" structure measuring about 123 square
kadi projects towards the road but does not obstruct public passage.
(ii) The petitioner submitted that Plot No.1471 under Khata No.450,
measuring Ac.0.050 dec. and recorded as homestead, originally
stood in the name of his late father, Narayan Sahoo, and is now
jointly succeeded by five sons and four daughters. It was further
submitted that the village road lies over Government Plot No.1492
under Khata No.1211.
(iii) It was submitted that repeated allegations of encroachment had
earlier compelled the petitioner's father to institute Civil Suit No.20
of 2013 seeking a decree of permanent injunction in respect of Plot
No.1471. Upon his death, the petitioner and his siblings were
substituted. The State of Odisha and the Tahasildar, Ranpur,
though defendants, did not contest the suit. The civil court, by
judgment dated 13.12.2024, held that the "taza" and verandah
constructed on Plot No.1471 did not encroach upon the village road
and permanently restrained the defendants from entering upon the
said plot. It was submitted that, in view of this decree, initiation of a
further encroachment proceeding was impermissible.
(iv) The petitioner further submitted that the civil court, while
decreeing the suit, also took note of this Court's order in CRLREV
No.811 of 2011, thereby examining the entire earlier dispute
concerning the alleged obstruction of the village road. Since the
decree has attained finality, not having been challenged by the State
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
or the Tahasildar, it was submitted that no fresh encroachment
proceeding could have been initiated.
(v) With respect to the intervention petition filed by certain villagers,
the petitioner submitted that the allegations therein merely repeat
issues raised in earlier proceedings and stand concluded by the civil
court decree. The materials relied on by the interveners, it is
contended, relate to past disputes which no longer survive.
(vi) It was further submitted that pursuant to this Court's order dated
20.08.2025, a fresh demarcation was carried out in the presence of
the petitioner and the local Sarpanch. The Revenue Inspector's
subsequent report, filed by the Tahasildar, is stated to be consistent
with the earlier demarcation and reflects that the alleged projection
comprises only a semi-circular "taza" and a few steps similar to
structures of adjoining houses, and does not obstruct the village
pathway.
(vii) Relying on the civil court decree and both demarcation reports, the
petitioner submitted that initiation of a further encroachment
proceeding is barred by the principle of constructive res judicata
under Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
(viii) It was further submitted that Plot No.1471 stands jointly
succeeded by all legal heirs of late Narayan Sahoo, and initiation of
the encroachment proceeding against only one heir is
unsustainable.
(ix) On the strength of the above, the petitioner submitted that the
action taken in L.E. Case No.315 of 2024-25 is without jurisdiction
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
and liable to be quashed. Although an appellate remedy was
available, the petitioner submitted that he was constrained to
invoke the writ jurisdiction since the impugned steps constitute a
continuation of earlier proceedings already examined by this Court.
III. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE OPPOSITE PARTIES:
6. Per contra, learned counsel for the Opposite Parties earnestly made
the following submissions:
(i) It was submitted that pursuant to the order of this Court dated
20.08.2025, a joint verification of the disputed site was conducted on
29.08.2025 in the presence of the petitioner and the local Sarpanch.
The verification was carried out on the basis of the Revenue
Inspector's report of the same date, which records that although
Plot No.1471 under Khata No.450 contains the petitioner's
homestead, the petitioner has extended a semi-circular portico
("taza") and house stairs into Government Plot No.1492 under
Khata No.1211, thereby encroaching upon the public road. The
Revenue Inspector is stated to have measured the encroachment as
16 links × 5 links, in addition to 134 square links covered by the
semi-circular projection, which, according to the report, causes
hindrance to public use. The Tahasildar submitted that the joint
verification confirmed these findings and has placed on record the
Revenue Inspector's report, the accompanying sketch map, and his
own report dated 01.09.2025.
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
IV. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE INTERVENERS:
7. Learned counsel for the Interveners made the following
submissions:
(i) It was submitted that the petitioner's father had earlier encroached
upon the public road, leading to initiation of Crl. Misc. Case No.25
of 2008 under Section 133 Cr.P.C. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate,
Nayagarh disposed of the said proceeding on 07.09.2011 directing
removal of the encroachment. A challenge to the said order in
CRLREV No.811 of 2011 was dismissed by this Court on 09.04.2013,
and a subsequent miscellaneous application for recall was also
dismissed on 08.01.2014.
(ii) It was submitted that the encroached area had been measured as
400 square links in the earlier Encroachment Case No.287 of 2007,
and that Encroachment Case No.315 of 2024-25 was initiated only
after the Tahasildar dropped the earlier L.E. case. The Interveners
allege that the Tahasildar has acted in collusion with the petitioner,
reducing the measurement of the encroachment from 400 sq. links
to 215 sq. links, and thereafter to 123 sq. links.
(iii) The Interveners further submitted that repeated writ petitions and
contempt proceedings had to be initiated to secure compliance with
the orders passed in earlier matters, including W.P.(C) No.20536 of
2016, CONTC No.924 of 2017, CONTC No.382 of 2022, and W.P.(C)
No.14045 of 2021. It is alleged that the petitioner, being a former
Panchayat Samiti Member, obstructed implementation of Court
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
directions and continued construction over the encroached portion
of the public road.
(iv) The Interveners submitted that the present writ petition is
untenable and liable to be dismissed as an abuse of the process of
Court, and that the petitioner, being an encroacher of a village road,
cannot claim any equitable relief.
V. EXAMINATION OF THE LEGAL MATRIX
8. Heard learned counsel for the Parties and perused the materials
placed on record.
9. The principal question that arises for consideration is whether the
encroachment proceeding culminating in issuance of Form-Ka,
Form-Kha and the final notice dated 22.04.2025 in Encroachment
Case No.315 of 2024-25 warrants interference under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India. An ancillary issue concerns the
continuance of the contempt petition.
10. Before examining the factual matrix, it is appropriate to outline the
settled legal position governing disputes under the Odisha
Prevention of Land Encroachment Act, 1972 and the scope of writ
jurisdiction in such matters.
11. The OPLE Act is a complete code providing for initiation, inquiry
and adjudication of cases of encroachment upon Government land
by the competent authority, with a statutory appeal before the Sub-
Collector. When such efficacious alternative remedy exists, the writ
court ordinarily exercises self-restraint and refrains from interfering
unless exceptional circumstances are demonstrated.
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
12. It is equally well settled that writ jurisdiction is not intended for
resolution of disputed questions of fact requiring technical analysis
of measurements, comparison of multiple demarcation reports or
determination of the precise extent of any construction vis-à-vis
Government land. These matters fall within the statutory domain of
the revenue authorities.
13. At the same time, when factual material of significance has been
collected pursuant to directions of this Court after the issuance of
the impugned notices, such material cannot be ignored. The
competent authority, while proceeding under the OPLE Act, is
duty-bound to take into account all relevant and material facts that
have subsequently come on record.
14. The record reflects that over the years different measurements,
namely 400 square links, 215 square links, 123 square links and 134
square links, have been recorded in various proceedings. This lack
of uniformity indicated uncertainty regarding the alleged extent of
encroachment. It was to remove this inconsistency that this Court,
by order dated 20.08.2025, directed a joint verification of the site in
the presence of the petitioner and the local Sarpanch.
15. The joint verification report dated 29.08.2025, prepared in the
presence of the petitioner, the local Sarpanch, the Tahasildar, the
Revenue Inspector and police personnel, together with the sketch
map, now provides a clear and authoritative factual foundation.
The report records that while the petitioner's homestead stands on
Plot No.1471 under Khata No.450, a portion of the semi-circular
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
portico at the entrance of the house, along with a set of stairs,
extends beyond the homestead boundary towards Government Plot
No.1492 under Khata No.1211, recorded as Rasta. The Revenue
Inspector has specifically measured the encroached area as
approximately 16 links in length and 5 links in breadth, forming the
base of the structure, with an additional semi-circular projection
covering about 134 square links which faces the public road. The
report further notes that this projection and the house stairs are
causing significant hindrance and difficulty to public use of the
village pathway. These findings represent the most recent and
reliable assessment of the physical situation.
16. It is undisputed that Form-Ka, Form-Kha and the final notice dated
22.04.2025 were issued prior to the Court-directed joint verification.
Consequently, while issuing the impugned notices, the Tahasildar
did not have the benefit of these latest and authoritative
measurements which directly bear upon the central issue under the
OPLE Act.
17. Now that the joint verification has resolved the earlier
inconsistencies and produced a clear factual basis, it would not be
appropriate to relegate the petitioner to the statutory appellate
remedy on the strength of the earlier measurements alone. Since the
subsequent demarcation contains material facts essential to a fair
adjudication, the matter must be reconsidered in the light of the
updated record. The civil court decree in Civil Suit No.20 of 2013
pertains only to Plot No.1471 and did not concern the alignment,
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
width or usage of Government Plot No.1492, and therefore does not
conclude the question of encroachment on Government land.
18. In these circumstances, the impugned notices cannot be sustained in
their present form. The Tahasildar is required to reassess the matter
afresh, taking note of the joint verification report dated 29.08.2025,
the sketch map, the materials in the encroachment record and the
contentions of all parties, and thereafter proceed strictly in
accordance with law.
19. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed in part.
20. Form-Ka, Form-Kha and the final notice dated 22.04.2025 issued in
Encroachment Case No.315 of 2024-25 are set aside. The matter is
remanded to the Tahasildar, Ranpur, who shall issue notice to the
petitioner and all concerned, afford them reasonable opportunity of
hearing, consider the joint verification report dated 29.08.2025, the
sketch map and all other relevant materials, and thereafter pass a
fresh, reasoned order strictly in accordance with law within six
weeks from the date of communication of this judgment. Until such
fresh order is passed, no coercive action shall be taken pursuant to
the earlier proceeding.
21. Insofar as CONTC No.3214 of 2025 is concerned, the direction
issued by this Court on 20.08.2025 for joint verification stands fully
complied with. The compliance affidavit enclosing the joint
verification report, the sketch map and the Tahasildar's report
establishes that no issue of wilful disobedience now survives for
Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
consideration. The contempt petition is, accordingly, rendered
infructuous.
22. CONTC No.3214 of 2025 is, accordingly, disposed of.
23. Interim order, if any, passed earlier in any of the Petitions stand
vacated.
(Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi)
Judge
Orissa High Court, Cuttack,
Dated the 29th Nov., 2025
