JUDGMENT

R. K. PATRA, J. — In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the opposite parties restraining them from evicting him from the disputed land and raising any con¬struction thereon.

2. Case of the petitioner is that the disputed land meas¬uring an area of Ac. 7.500 decimals appertaining to plot No. 258 (Sabik Plot No. 216) under Khata No. 619 (Sabik Khata No. 303) in mouza Chandrasekharpur originally belonged to the estate of Kanika. On 15.6.1941, the Raja of Kanika settled it in favour of the father of the petitioner by creating occupancy right. This fact was recorded in Jamabandi Khatian of Kanika Raja. After abolition of estate, the intermediary instead of the Raja vested in the State Government. The Raja submitted tenants' ledger (Ekpadia) in the office of the Tahsildar, Cuttack wherein the name of the father of the petitioner came to be mentioned at Sl. No. 343. After the death of his father, the petitioner inherited occupancy right over the disputed land and became the rightful owner thereof. In the year 1972, mouza Chandrasekharpur in which the disputed land is located was transferred to Bhubaneswar Tahsil. The settlement authorities erroneously recorded the disputed land as ‘rakshit’ despite the fact that the petitioner and his deceased father have been in possession of the same. Being aggrieved by such wrong entry, the petitioner filed Muta¬tion Case No. 175 of 1989 before the Tahsildar, Bhubaneswar. The Additional Tahsildar by his order dated 25.1.1993 directed to mutate the petitioner’s name. The Tahsildar, Bhubaneswar filed Mutation Appeal No. 12 of 1995 before the Sub-Collector, Bhubaneswar challenging the validity of the order dated 25.1.1993 of the Additional Tahsildar. The Sub-Collector disposed of the appeal on 31.7.1999 observing that since a Civil Suit (T.S.No. 324 of 1996) is pending between the parties, it is open for them to establish their claims. Subsequently, the Collector, Khurda intimated a suo motu revision (Suo Motu Revision No. 1 of 1999) in respect of the order of the Additional Tahsildar passed in Mutation Case No. 175 of 1989. The petitioner thereafter filed writ petition bearing O.J.C.No. 4741 of 2000 challenging the initiation of the suo motu revision case. This Court by order dated 12.7.2000 disposed of the writ petition observing that since the dispute between the parties is pending before the Civil Court, there is no need to continue the suo motu revision case. While the matter stood thus, the opposite parties on 13.11.1999 came to the disputed land and started measuring it. On 21.5.2001, they demolished a portion of the compound wall. In these circumstances, finding no other alternative, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

3. The opposite parties in this case are the Bhubaneswar Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as the ‘B.D.A.’) through its Secretary and its Vice-Chairman. Their case is that the State Government in the General Administration Department is the owner of the disputed land. With a view to develop Social Housing Projects, the General Administration Department by order No. 12962 dated 22.9.1999 (Annexure-A/1) accorded advance posses¬sion of government land measuring an area of Ac. 66.645 in dif¬ferent mouzas as detailed therein in favour of the B.D.A. by way of lease. One of the areas is land measuring Ac. 9.360 corre¬sponding to revenue plot Nos. 258, 267 and 293 under khata No. 619 in mouza Chakdrasekharpur. Accordingly lease deed was executed and on 28.9.1999 advance possession of entire area was given to the B.D.A. On receipt of the advance possession, au¬thorities of B.D.A. decided to carve out an area of Ac. 2.512 out of Ac. 3.512 of plot No. 258 for the purpose of construction of housing project in the first phase. Accordingly, barbed wire fencing was constructed over Ac. 2.512 on 16.12.1999. This would indicate that from the date of handing over of possession by the General Administration Department to the B.D.