PASAYAT, J.

( 1 ) THESE four writ applications are inter-linked and are disposed of by this common judgment. Petitioner in each case had applied for permission in terms of the Orissa Development Authorities Act, 1982 (in short, the 'act') for development of the land by construction of building.

( 2 ) FACTUAL position so far as undisputed is as follows :application was filed for approval of plan along with requisite fees. The same was taken up for consideration by the Building and Planning Committee, and the Committee recommended for issuance of permission for construction of apartments. Subsequently the opposite parties asked for furnishing certain information. These were furnished. Notice under sub-section (7) of Section 16 was given by registered post.

( 3 ) THE controversy revolves round the question whether there was approval of the plan by operation of the deeming provision contained in the proviso to sub-section (3) of Section 16 of the Act, and by operation of sub-sections (7) and (8) of said Section.

( 4 ) ACCORDING to the petitioners, as the authorities did not take steps as were mandated in law, by operation of the deeming provision, the plans are deemed to have been a