The main legal point established is that the ODA Act provides conclusive and final decisions with adequate and efficacious remedies, implying the implied ousting of Civil Court jurisdiction.

A. S. NAIDU, J.

( 1 ) THE Puri-Konark Development Authority, a creature of the Orissa Development Authorities Act (hereinafter called 'the ODA Act' for brevity), has filed this writ application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking a declaration that the Civil Courts have no jurisdiction to examine any order passed under Section 91 of the ODA Act and/or pass any order of injunction restraining the Statutory Authorities constituted under the ODA Act from carrying on their statutory duties. It has also been prayed to issue appropriate direction to dismiss Title Suit Nos. 382/97, 443/97, 215/98, 217/98 and 221/98 as also Misc. Case Nos. 246/97, 277/97, 137/98, 139/98 and 144/98 respectively pending before the Civil Judge (S. D.), Puri initiated by the opposite parties.

( 2 ) BY order dated 15/12/1998, while issuing Rule Nisi, this Court was pleased to stay further proceedings of the aforesaid suits and call for the lower Court records for perusal. All the said suits have been filed inter alia challenging initiation of proceedings under Section 91 of the ODA Act as well as the notices issued under the said Act by the petitioner-Authority. For the sake of brevity and better appreciation, the prayer of Title Suit No. 443 of 1997 which is almost identical in all the suits, is quoted hereunder :-"pass a decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from giving effect to the notice-cum-letter bearing No. 1226/pkda dated 1-8-1997 (First Day of August Nineteen Hundred Ninetyseven) and 5-8-1997 (Fifth Day of August Nineteen Hundred Ninetyseven) and from interfering with the possession of the plaintiff over the suit properties and from demolishing or damaging any structure or part thereof and causing any waste and damage thereto in any manner whatsoever. "

( 3 ) AS the suits are admittely pending in the Court below and any observation made by us may amount to prejudging the issue, we refrain from entering into the area of factual controversies and confine our judgment only to the question of law.

( 4 ) THE point of law which is raised by the petitioners in this case is whether the provisions contained in Section 91 (2) of the ODA Act to the effect that the "decision of the State Government or the officer shall be final" and "shall not be questioned" in any Court or law, impliedly ousts the jurisdiction of the Civil Court ?

( 5 ) THE Legislature in its wisdom enacted the ODA Act in the year 1982 and constituted Development Authorities under the said Act. The main objective sought to be achieved, as would be evident from the Preamble of the Act, is to ensure planned development of different towns of the State and to obstruct unsystematic and unplanned growth and/or constructions, thereby giving rise to serious distortion in future. The Development Authorities were vested with powers to prepare development plans including Zonal Development Plans, to undertake works pertaining to constructions of housing colonies, shopping centres, markets, industrial estates and provide public amenities. One of its paramount duties is also to regulate development/construction and use of land including private lands and undertake schemes for improvement and clearance of slums and re-development programmes.

( 6 ) CHAPTER V of the ODA Act deals with development of lands. Section 15 prohibits development without permission. Under the said Section, no person including a Department of the Central or State Government or a local authority or a body corporate constituted under any law is authorised to subdivide any land for utilising, selling, leasing out or otherwise disposing of, changing the use of any land or building or undertake or carry out any development in any building or in or over any land without obtaining permission in writing from the concerned Development Authority.

( 7 ) SECTION 16 of the Act provides the modalities for filing applications for obtaining such permission as well as sanction. Sub-section (3) of S