JUDGMENT

Arindam Sinha, J. - Mr. Padhy, led by Mr. Rath, learned advocates appear on behalf of petitioner. With leave of his leader Mr. Padhy submits, his client is one of successive subsequent purchasers, from original allottee, in respect of the leasehold interest transferred to him. Lease Revision Case no.9 of 2015 was initiated suo motu by the authority. In said case by impugned order dated 8th November, 2017 the authority cancelled the lease sanctioned in favour of original allottee, on 25th July, 1973.

2. Original allottee had transferred his leasehold interest in the meantime. Successive transfers were made and ultimately his client purchased leasehold interest in respect of part of original lease allotment. Other similarly placed purchasers had, by separate respective writ petition assailed impugned order passed in Lease Revision Cases initiated against them. By decision dated 11th December, 2019 of co-ordinate Bench in Acrux Realcon Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Orissa, reported in 2020 (I) ILR-CUT, 262 orders passed by the Additional District Magistrate, Bhubaneswar in Lease Revision Case nos.1 to 13 of 2015, were set aside. Mr. Padhy points out, Lease Revision Case no.9 of 2015,