The court established that decisions affecting property rights must adhere to principles of natural justice, ensuring affected parties are given the right to be heard.

By the Bench:

1. The Petitioner in this writ petition seeks to assail the order dated 29^th April, 1999 (Annexure-3) passed by learned Additional District Magistrate, Khurda in Revision Case No.57 of 1998 initiated under Section 7A(3) of the Odisha Government Land Settlement Act, 1962 (for brevity ‘the Act’).

2. Mr. Nayak, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that one, Golak Bihari Samantray, being Ex-army personnel, was leased out Ac.5.00 decimals of land in Plot No.67 under Khata No.237 situated in Mouza Similipatana under Bhubaneswar Tahasil in the district of Khurda (for brevity ‘the case land’), pursuant to order dated 2^nd June, 1977 of Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar in W.L. Lease Case No.179 of 1977. A lease deed was also executed in favour of the lessee observing the formalities. After expiry of the period of restrictions to transfer the land mentioned in the lease deed, the lessee, namely, Golak Bihari Samantray for his legal necessities alienated Ac.0.100 decimals out of the case land to the Petitioner by executing Registered Sale Deed dated 13^th September, 1994 (Annexure-2) and delivered possession to the Petitioner. Since then, the Petitioner is in possession over the land she has purchased out of the case land exercising her right, title and interest thereon. Proceeding under Section 7A(3) of the Act in Revision Case No.57 of 1998 was initiated alleging material irregularities in leasing out the case land in favour of the vendor of the Petitioner. Although notices were issued to the vendor of the Petitioner, but no notice, whatsoever, was served on the Petitioner to contest the proceeding although learned Additional District Magistrate, Khurda was aware of the fact that separate parcels of the case land had already been sold to different persons including the Petitioner by the time the suo motu revision, i.e., Revision Case No.57 of 1998 was taken up for adjudication. Alleging material irregularities in settling the land in favour of the vendor of the Petitioner, learned Additional District Magistrate held that the lease granted in W.L. Lease Case No.179 of 1977 was illegal and irregular. Learned Additional District Magistrate, therefore, set aside the order dated 2^nd June, 1977 of Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar settling the case land in favour of the vendor of the Petitioner. Consequently, the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar was directed to correct the Record of Right (RoR) and take over possession of the case land. Accordingly, the case land was taken back to the government khata (record) by correcting the RoR.

2.1 When the RoR of the case land, out of which the Petitioner had purchased Ac.0.100 decimals, was recorded in government khata, the Petitioner filed Revision Case No. 688 of 2022 under Section 15 (b) of the Odisha Survey and Settlement Act, 1958 before the Member, Board of Revenue, Odisha, Cuttack for correction of RoR. At the stage of argument of the said revision, it came to light that the lease granted in favour of the vendor of the Petitioner was cancelled and the case land was taken to government khata pursuant to the direction in Revision Case No.57 of 1998. Hence, finding no other alternative, the Petitioner has filed this writ petition. As such, there occurred some delay in filing the writ petition, which is bona fide and not intentional.

3. Mr. Nayak, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that at the time of purchase, the Petitioner had verified the records, i.e., the order passed in W.L.L. Case No.179 of 1977 settling the case land in favour of Golak Bihari Samantray, who was an Ex-army personnel and the RoR published in his name together with allied documents such as rent receipts etc. On a bona fi