Nirupama Das v. State Of Odisha

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C) No. 4849 of 2022 Nirupama Das ....

Petitioner Mr. Prakash K. Mishra, Advocate -versusState of Odisha and others ....

Opp. Parties Mr. Swayambhu Mishra, Additional Standing Counsel (For Opposite Party Nos.1 to 4)

CORAM:

JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

08.04.2022 3.

1.

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2.

Petitioner in this writ petition prays for a direction to Additional Sub-Collector, Jagatsinghur-Kujanga (OP No.3) to dispose of the petition dated 27th March, 2019 (Annexure-2) within a stipulated period.

3.

Mr. Mishra, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that pursuant to the direction vide order dated 26th February, 2016 (Annexure-1) of the Land Reforms Commissioner, Odisha, Cuttack-Opposite Party No.2 in Consolidation Revision Case No.388 of 2014, he submitted an application on 27th March, before the Additional Sub-Collector, Jagatsinghpur-Kujang-Opposite Party No.3 to carry out the order. It is his submission that neither the said application has yet been registered nor any endeavour is made to carry out direction of the Land Reforms Commissioner under

// 2 // Annexure-1. His persuasions went in vain. Hence, finding no other alternative, he filed the present writ petition. 4.

In order to ascertain the factual position, Mr. Mishra, learned ASC sought for an adjournment to take instruction in the matter. Today, Mr. Mishra, on instruction, submits that the Additional Sub-Collector-Opposite Party No.3, who is at present functioning at Major Settlement Office, Jobra, Cuttack is not in a position to carry out the said order, as though the Petitioner was directed to furnish the schedule of the case land before the Additional Sub-Collector-Opposite Party No.3 in reference to the Consolidation plot numbers and area of which she seeks correction, no such information has yet been furnished by her. Only an application without signature and affidavit of the Petitioner has been filed by her counsel on 27th March, 2019 under Annexure-2.

The Petitioner did not even enclose the order passed by the Land Reforms Commissioner under Annexure-1 to the said petition. As such, the Opposite Party No.3 is not in a position to carry out the said order. However, it is his submission that in the event the Petitioner files a fresh application enclosing a copy of order under Annexure-1 to comply with the direction made therein, steps shall be taken for early disposal of the said petition in accordance with law.

5.

Taking into consideration the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case of the Petitioner, disposes of the writ petition with a direction that in the event the Petitioner submits an application for compliance of order dated 26th February, 2015 passed by Land Reforms Commissioner in

// 3 // Consolidation Revision Case No.388 of 2014 complete in all respect within a period of two weeks hence along with certified copy of this order, to comply with direction made therein, the Additional Sub-Collector, Jagatsinghpur-Kujang-Opposite Party No.3 shall do well to consider the same in accordance with law giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four months there from and communicate the result thereof to the Petitioner.

Issue urgent certified copy of the order on proper application.

(K.R. Mohapatra) Judge s.s.satapathy