Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA, J.
M/s. Lingaraj Infrastructure Private Ltd. Bhubaneswar - Petitioner
Versus
State of Odisha & Others - Opposite Parties
WP(C) No.2765 of 2024
Decided on : 10-03-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition filed for quashing an order (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. authority's jurisdiction in halting constructions (Para 6 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. hearing of parties including intervenor (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. determining authority's jurisdiction in disputes (Para 12 , 19) |
| 5. conditions under which construction may be halted (Para 13 , 18) |
| 6. petition granted, order quashed (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
ORDER :
ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA, J.
1. This writ petition under Article 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the petitioner praying for quashing (setting aside) an order dated 16.01.2024 (Annexure-1) passed by the Opposite Party No.3(City Planner, Bhubaneswar Municipal Corporation, Bhubaneswar) under Section 92 of the ODISHA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITIES ACT , 1982 (in short ODA Act) and to direct the Opposite Parties issuing a writ of mandamus to drop all the consequential proceedings arising out of the said proceeding under Section 92 of the ODA Act, 1982.
2. According to the petitioner, the petitioner is a private limited company engaged in real estate development. The petitioner company and one Shyam Shree Residency Pvt. Ltd. (M/s. Shyam Shree/Partner Developer) purchased two adjacent plots vide Plot Nos.516/1759 & 516/1759/4921 respectively under Khata Nos.474/4108 & 474/4107 forming an area of Ac.0.650 decimals in Mouza-Patia, Bhubaneswar in the year 2010 through two separate sale deeds (Annexure-2 series) for the real estate development purposes. Since the date of their above purchase, the petitioner and its partner M/s. Shyam Shree Residency Pvt. Ltd are the lawful owners and in possession over plot Nos.516/1759 & 516/1759/4921. The petitioner and its partner Shyam Shree Residency Pvt. Ltd both have mutated to their aforesaid purchased plots to their names and after mutation, separate R.o.Rs have already been prepared in their names under Khata Nos.474/4108 & 474/4107 (as per Annexure-3). The total area of both the plots is Ac.0.650 Decimals.
3. The petitioner and its partner M/s. Shyam Shree Residency Pvt. Ltd made an application before the Opposite Party No.3(City Planner, Bhubaneswar Municipal Corporation, Bhubaneswar) for an approval of their building plan for construction of a commercial building over their plot Nos.516/1759 & 516/1759/4921 under Khata Nos.474/4108 & 474/4107 in Mouza-Patia. So, as per the requirement of Opposite Party No.3, the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar (Opp. Party No.4) submitted a demarcation report through its letter dated 26.12.2014 vide Annexure-4 confirming the boundaries of the above two plots vide plot Nos.516/1759 & 516/1759/4921 on the basis of measurement by Revenue Inspector in presence the intervenor- petitioner and others. Then, in response to the letter dated 29.08.2017 vide Annexure-5 of Opposite Party No.3, the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar (Opp. Party No.4) vide its letter No.10984 dated 28.07.2018 (Annexure-6) submitted report before the Opposite Party No.3 confirming the identity of plot Nos. 516/1759 & 516/1759/4921 along with its demarcation indicating lawful possession of the petitioner and its partner Shyam Shree Residency Pvt. Ltd over the same. Thereafter, again on the asking of Opp. Party No.3, the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar as per its letter dated 14.07.2022 (Annexure-8) submitted report stating about the possession of the petitioner and its partner M/s. Shyam Shree Residency Private Limited over plot Nos.516/1759 & 516/1759/4921 after its proper demarcation.
Then, through letter dated 09.09.2022 (Annexure-9) Opp. Party No.3 requested Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar (Opp. Party No.4) to confirm the possession of the petitioners and its partner over plot Nos.516/1759 & 516/1759/4921 under Khata No.474/4108 and474/4107 on the basis of the demarcation made. So, as per letter dated 14.09.2022 (Annexure-10), the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar (Opp. Party No.4) confirmed the possession of the petitioner and its partner M/s. Shyam Shree over plot Nos.516/1759 &516/1759/4921 in Mouza-Patia on t
The planning authority lacks jurisdiction to halt construction based on private land disputes, which must be resolved by civil courts.
A petitioner must establish ownership and prove claims regarding land disputes to secure injunctive relief against construction, particularly when prior judicial outcomes are unfavorable.
Point of law: There is a presumption that public officials would discharge their duties honestly and in accordance with law. Even administrative power to be exercised to fulfill real purpose and not ....
Regulatory powers of NOIDA cannot arbitrarily deny building permits; valid ownership rights must be respected and decisions must be backed by statutory reasons.
The court emphasized that demolition orders under the West Bengal Panchayat Act must come from authorized bodies, prohibiting post facto sanctions for unauthorized constructions.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
