[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Orissa High Court

M. Krishna Rao vs State Of Odisha on 17 March, 2026

Author: B.P. Routray

Bench: B.P. Routray

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: MANAS KUMAR PANDA
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 17-Mar-2026 19:49:02




                                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                                      WP(C) No.19528 of 2023

                                      (Under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India)


                             M. Krishna Rao                              ....                 Petitioner

                                                                      -versus-

                             State of Odisha, represented
                             through its Secretary, Department
                             of General Administration and ...                          Opposite Parties
                             Others

                           Advocate(s) appeared in this case:-

                                          For Petitioner       :   Mr. Amit Prasad Bose, Advocate
                                          For Opp. Parties     :   Mr. R. Pradhan, A.S.C.
                                                                   Mr. D. Mohapatra, Senior Counsel
                                                                   for O.P. No.2
                                                                   Mr. Debakanta Mohanty, counsel for
                                                                   O.P. No.3

                                             CORAM: JUSTICE B.P. ROUTRAY
                                                              JUDGMENT

17th March, 2026

B.P. Routray, J.

1. Heard Mr. A.P. Bose, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. D.

Mohapatra, learned senior counsel for Bhubaneswar Development

Authority (BDA) (O.P. No.2), Mr. D. Mohanty, learned counsel for

Bhubaneswar Municipal Corporation (BMC) (O.P. No.3) and Mr. R.

Pradhan, learned ASC for opposite party No.1.

Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack

2. The petitioner is the allottee of residential plot No.170 under

Kalinga Vihar Housing Scheme (MIG Category). The order of allotment

under Annexure-1 was issued on 5th September, 2003.

3. The case of the petitioner is that there is a surplus patch of land

behind his plot measuring 40 feet X 46 feet (1840 Sq. Feet) belonging to

BDA (O.P. No.2), adjacent to his land and the same is left unused.

Accordingly the petitioner made an application on 9th December 2004

(Annexure-4) to allot said surplus land in his favour.

4. In the year 2020 an advertisement dated 30 th December 2020 was

issued by the BDA proposing to dispose of un-allotted cut piece lands

available to the allotted house / residential / commercial plots within the

housing / plotted development / commercial scheme under the BDA with

such specified terms and conditions, inter alia, that the left out patches of

land within the buildable area of the scheme cannot be used otherwise or

developed as independent residential or commercial plots, which may be

considered for allotment to the land owner who has a plot contiguous or

adjacent to it, and the additional land can be allotted on payment of price

which is equivalent to double of the present Benchmark value. There are

Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack

many other stipulations as prescribed under the said advertisement at

Annexure-3 including such other criteria to be decided by the authority.

5. It is submitted by Mr. Bose, learned counsel on behalf of the

petitioner that, the application of the petitioner for allotment of the

surplus patch of land dated 9th December 2004 is still pending

consideration before opposite party no.2 and in the meantime the

advertisement dated 30th December 2020 under Annexure-3 has been

issued. It is true that after issuance of the advertisement under Annexure-

3, the petitioner has not made any application for allotment of the surplus

land in his occupation adjoining to his plot to the authority till date. But

this court while considering cases of some other plot owners in different

writ petitions, viz., WP(C) No.19522 of 2023, WP(C) No.19526 of 2023,

WP(C) No.19532 of 2023, WP(C) No.19531 of 2023 and other writ

petitions, where those respective petitioners had applied for grant of the

surplus land in their favour pursuant to issuance of the advertisement

under Annexure-3, has passed certain directions to take decision in

respect of those petitioners regarding allotment of such surplus lands.

6. Mr. Bose further submits that though the petitioner has not applied

for allotment of the surplus land in his favour, but the fact remains

Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack

undisputed that said surplus patch of land measuring 40 feet X 46 feet is

in occupation of the petitioner till date from the date of his allotment of

plot No.170. Accordingly, he may be permitted to apply to the authority

concerned pursuant to the advertisement at Annexure-3 and in such event

the case of the petitioner may also be considered by the authority

appropriately.

7. Mr. Mohapatra, learned senior counsel for BDA submits that the

decision to allot such additional lands pursuant to the advertisement

under Annexure-3 is to be taken by the authority yet, subject to such

terms and conditions prescribed in Annexure-3 and such other conditions

to be fulfilled as per the decision of the authority. Mr. Mohapatra further

submits that the petitioner is a sheer encroacher of the additional land

adjacent to his allotted land who has constructed a boundary wall around

the same and now by virtue of his application as per Annexure-4 series

the petitioner is claiming right for allotment of such additional land in his

favour. According to Mr. Mohapatra, when the authority has not taken

the decision yet, regarding allotment of such additional lands to the

contiguous land owners within the housing scheme area, no right can

said to have accrued in favour of the petitioner to get the additional land

allotted in his favour.

Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack

8. Mr. Mohapatra, learned senior counsel further submits that in the

given facts of the present case the petitioner cannot be treated equally

with those other petitioners for the reason that he has not approached the

authority for allotment of the surplus land pursuant to issuance of the

advertisement under Annexure-3.

9. Opposite party no.3 is the BMC who has been subsequently

handed over such lands by the BDA (O.P. No.2) and according to the

submission of the petitioner as well as Mr. Mohapatra, learned senior

counsel for opposite party no.3 present dispute with regard to the

additional lands is no way connected with BMC since no such land is

given to opposite party no.3 presently disputed by the petitioner to claim

in his favour. The land which is in possession of Municipal Corporation

is not presently disputed by the petitioner and so, opposite party no.3 has

no occasion to object to the prayer of the petitioner.

10. Pursuant to order dated 10th September 2025 of this court, a joint

demarcation of the land was conducted by GA Department on 8th

December 2025 in presence of opposite party No.2, 3 and the petitioner

and the report thereof has been filed at Annexure-A/2 to the counter of

opposite party no.2. Said joint demarcation report dated 8 th December

Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack

2025 under Annexure-A/2 reveals that the lands allotted to BMC in

respect of each plot named in the report have been segregated and there

is no dispute about the land allotted to BMC. It is also seen that the

petitioner's claim is in respect of the additional land measuring 40 feet x

46 feet as shown in the chart under Annexure-A/2.

11. As stated above the petitioner was in occupation of the extra land

measuring 40 feet x 46 feet as per the demarcation report under

Annexure-A/2 since the date of allotment of the land in Plot No.170. The

prayer of the petitioner is of two-fold, first, not to demolish the boundary

wall constructed covering such additional patch of land and secondly, to

consider his application under Annexure-4 for allotment of the additional

land in his favour keeping in view the fact of advertisement made by

BDA in the year 2020 as well as the allotment of land to similarly

situated land owners.

12. As per the submissions made on behalf of opposite party no.2, the

authority is yet to take a decision on the allotment of extra patch of land

in terms of the advertisement made on 30 th December 2020 under

Annexure-3. In this regard opposite party no.2 has stated at paragraph 4

of its counter as follows:-

Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack

"4. xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx

As regards the request of the petitioner to allot the said extra land in their favour citing allotment made in favour of other house owners, it is submitted that the Authority has not yet considered the same for the reason to examine as to whether such area cannot otherwise be utilized for the purpose of BDA.

Upon decision taken and in case it is found that the encroachers comply the conditions, the encroached land may be allotted to the adjoining land owners on such terms and conditions to be fixed by BDA as per Land Allotment Regulation and the decision of the Authority in this regard. Except the contentions referred to above, other contentions made in these paragraphs of the writ petition are stoutly denied."

13. Upon hearing both parties and considering the facts as submitted

by the petitioner as well as opposite party no.2 and taking note of the

direction of this court passed in other writ petitions stated above, present

writ petition is also disposed of with a direction to opposite party No.2 to

consider the prayer of the petitioner for allotment of the surplus land in

his occupation as per the joint demarcation report under Annexure-A/2,

in the event the petitioner makes an application to that effect in terms of

the advertisement under Annexure-3, within a period of 30 days from

today along with the certified copy of this order.

14. Opposite party no.2 is further directed to take decision in respect

of petitioner's prayer to get such adjacent additional land to be allotted in

Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack