IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
Sanjeeb K. Panigrahi, J.
Soubhagya Kumar Sahoo - Petitioner
Versus
State of Odisha & Ors. - Opposite Parties
W.P.(C) No.41879 of 2023
Decided On : 21-08-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's request regarding construction on disputed land. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioner's claim of blocked ingress and egress. (Para 4) |
| 3. state's response and report on the disputed property. (Para 5) |
| 4. court's analysis and conclusion on property access. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 5. final decision to dismiss the writ petition. (Para 8) |
ORDER :
Sanjeeb K. Panigrahi, J.
1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.
2. In filing this Writ Petition, the Petitioner has sought for a direction from this Court to the Opposite Parties for not making any further construction over the land appertaining to plot No.49, Khata No.104 in Mouza- Mulusingha which is in front of the land of the present Petitioner in question.
3. Heard.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that due to the construction made over the disputed property in question by the Opposite Parties, the ingress and egress to the land of the Petitioner in question is going to the blocked. He, accordingly, prays for allowing the prayer made in this Writ Petition.
5. At this juncture, drawing the attention of this Court to the paragraph No.6 of the counter affidavit at the instance of the Opposite Party Nos.2 & 4, learned counsel for the State submits that pertaining to the dispute involved herein the Tahasildar, Odapada has already submitted his report. The averments pertaining to the said report stated in the counter affidavit is extracted herein below:-
“The plot No.49/593/764 and 49/593/801 stands recorded in the name of the Petitioners which are parts of plot No.49/593 and falls adjacent to the Plot No.49 which is in the name of the Government of Odisha. The land identified for Vana Suraksha Samiti Building is a piece of land measuring an area of 6000 sq ft (Ac.0.1377) which is within the area of Ac.18.25 pertaining to Plot No.49 under Khata No.104 of Mouza Mulisingh which stands recorded in the name of the Government of Odisha under Abada Jogya Anabadi Khata. The piece of land identified is recetangular in shape with a length of 80 ft. and a breadth of 75 ft. The kissam of the Plot No.49 is “PATITA” which is suitable to be utilized for Government projects such as Vana Suraksha Samiti Building. The frontage of the piece of land within Plot No.49 where the land is identified for Vana Suraksha Samiti Building that stands in front of Plot No.49/593 is 99 ft. however the frontage of the land identified for VAna Suraksha Samiti Building is 80 ft. and there is still 19 ft. left from the frontage of the said piece of land. As per the settlement map, there is no Government road to plot no.49/593. The nearest Government road to the plot of the Petitioner is Plot No.46 having kissam as “DANDA” under “Sarba Sadharana” khata. There is plot No.48 which also stands recorded in the name of Government of Odisha under Abada Jyogya Anabadi Khata in between the plot no.49/593 and Plot No.46. As per the verification of the ROR Khata No.104, the plot No.48 stands recorded in the name of Government of Odisha under Abada Jogya Anabadi Khata with a note Signature Not Verified in the “Remarks” column stating the name of Giridhari Naik, S/o-Ananda Naik, Caste-Saara, Village-Reason: Authentication Panchupati as he had forcibly encroached the plot no.48. However, on filed enquiry, it is found that the plot No.48 is lying vacant. The above details are reflected in the sketch map of the said plot.”
6. He further contends that after construction over the disputed property in question there is still vacant space for the ingress and egress to the private property of the Petitioner. Hence, this Writ Petition is not maintainable.
7. Considering the submissions made on behalf of the parties and looking to the report of the Tahasildar, Odapada pertaining to the dispute involved herein, this Court is of the view that there is no disturbance for the ingress and egress to the private property of the Petitioner in question. This Court, therefore, declines to entertain the prayer made in this Writ Petit
AI
Writ petition dismissed as no obstruction to access was found despite ongoing construction on adjacent government land.
The question of access to the land and grievances regarding construction on the land are factual in nature, and alternative legal recourses are available to address such grievances.
Municipal authorities cannot grant construction permissions on government land recorded for public utility purposes; actions taken without appropriate jurisdiction are unlawful.
Petitioner lacks locus standi to challenge construction on government poramboke land where property access remains unobstructed.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.