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 · 325 wordsArindam Sinha, J
Petitioner has challenged cancellation of permission dated 24th November, 2015, issued by Bhubaneswar Development Authority (BDA) on ground that the Supreme Court of India had observed in SLP(C)...CC nos.10198-10199 of 2014 (State of Odisha and another v. Banalata Das and others), impugned order before said Court (order dated 8th January, 2014, in review, made by the Division Bench of this Court) shall not create title in favour of respondents (one of whom, being constituted attorney of claimed owners, is petitioner). He submits, this cancellation is not in terms of provisions for revocation of permission, given in section 17 of Odisha Development
Authorities Act, 1982.
On query from Court Mr. Mohapatra, learned advocate appearing on behalf of BDA submits, instructions were received by communication dated 6th August, 2014 made by Director of Estates & Ex-Officio Additional Secretary to Government saying, inter alia, as reproduced below.
“In view of above orders of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, the permission/approval of plan over the case land, if already granted in pursuance of orders dated 8.01.2014 of High Court of Orissa passed in W.P.(C) No.911/2011 & 1090/2011, may be cancelled immediately under intimation to this Department.
This is most Urgent.”
He submits further, perusal of impugned cancellation letter will show that the cancellation was pursuant to issuance of show cause and therefore on application of mind. Petitioner has alternative remedy of statutory appeal. The writ petition should be dismissed.
Mr. Sharma, learned advocate, Additional Government Advocate appears on behalf of State and submits, State initiated OEA Case no.1 of 2017 in the Court of Collector, Khordha under section 5(i) of Odisha Estate Abolition Act, 1951. That case is pending. As such, petitioner does not have clear title over the land and consequently the cancellation was duly made. He prays for adjournment to obtain instruction and submit further.
Adjournment granted is peremptory. List on 22nd March, 2022 as prayed for by State.
……………………...