High CourtsSingle Bench

Karunakar Rath vs State Of Odisha And Others

Orissa High Court · Decided on 12 December 2023 · Citation: (2023) 12 OHC CK 0061

HON’BLE JUDGES
R.K. Pattanaik, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (C) No. 40421 Of 2023
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

10 paragraphs · 439 words

R.K. Pattanaik, J

1.

Heard the petitioner in person and Mr. Patra, learned ASC for the State opposite parties.

2.

Instant writ petition is filed by the petitioner for a direction to the opposite parties not to evict him and demolish his house and boundary wall situate over Plot Nos.1226/2303, 1227/2304, 1228/2305 under Khata No.403/1002 of Mouza-Madhuban, Tahasil-Baranga, Cuttack without following due process of law.

3.

Referring to Amin’s report as at Annexure-2 series and photographs at Annexure-5 series, the petitioner submits that the construction for widening of the road at the instance of opposite party No.4 is likely to involve and include a portion of the plots owned by him and same is without any acquisition proceeding. By placing reliance on a copy of this Court order in W.P.(C) No.24759 of 2022 as at Annexure-4, it is further submitted that in the said case, direction has been issued not to demolish and go for eviction against the petitioner therein without following due process of law. Since the petitioner is similarly situated and a part of the plots owned by him is likely to be acquired at the time of widening of road, he lastly submits that at least, the grievance under Annexure-3 should be examined by opposite party No.4 at the earliest before any such construction and demolition takes place.

4.

Mr. Patra, learned ASC for the State submits that considering the nature of claim advanced and the fact that the petitioner has already approached the authorities below vide Annexure-3, if the Court is inclined, appropriate order may perhaps be passed with a direction to examine it according to law.

5.

Having regard to the submission of petitioner and Mr. Patra, learned ASC, the Court is of the considered view that the grievance under Annexure-3 pending decision should be examined by opposite party No.4 as soon as possible before any such widening of the road is undertaken with the necessary construction made in that regard.

6.

Hence, it is ordered.

7.

In the result, the writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to opposite party No.4 to consider the representation i.e. Annexure-3 and after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, to dispose it of and to decide future course of action. It is further directed the said grievance vide Annexure-3shall be disposed of within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and till such time, to defer the construction near the schedule land vis-à-vis widening of the road as contemplated.

8.

A certified copy of this order be granted as per rules and in course of the day.

………………………………