Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
K.R.MOHAPATRA, SAVITRI RATHO
Bharati Satpathy – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's claim on land ownership (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. government's defense of jurisdiction (Para 5) |
| 3. jurisdiction issues regarding orders (Para 6 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. court's directive on land recording (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
JUDGMENT :
1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
3. Mr. Samantaray, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that initially, Plot No.583/1651 to an extent of Ac.1.000 decimals of Khata No.325/1034 in Mouza Pathargadia under Bhubaneswar Tahasil in the district of Khurda (erstwhile district of Puri) was leased out in the name of one Pitabasa Behera by the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar vide order dated 11th October, 1974 passed in W.L. Lease Case No.1645 of 1974. Accordingly, RoR was issued in favour of the lessee stipulating therein that the land could not be transferred within a period of five years from the date of lease. Pitabasa Behera, after a lapse of 18 years, alienated different parcels of land to different persons through his registered Power of Attorney for legal necessity. The Power of Attorney sold an area of Ac.0.100 decimals out of the leasehold property to the Petitioner vide Registered Sale Deed No.769 dated 23rd March, 1993 and del
An order made without jurisdiction is null and void, reinforcing the established property rights in land ownership disputes under the Odisha Survey and Settlement Act, 1958.
An order made without jurisdiction is void and cannot be sustained; ownership rights established must be recognized despite conflicting authority actions.
Orders made by statutory authorities lacking jurisdiction can be challenged in writ petitions, especially when valid leases are ignored, affirming the court's authority to rectify such errors.
A writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 is maintainable when statutory authorities act without jurisdiction, allowing for correction of records even after finalization.
Writ petitions are maintainable where statutory authorities exceed or usurp their jurisdiction, particularly when prior valid leases are ignored, necessitating correction of Record of Rights in favor....
Authority cannot cancel confirmed leases under a different statute, maintaining jurisdiction of High Court to intervene when lower authority exceeds legal bounds.
The court ruled that administrative bodies must act within jurisdiction, and violations of due process make orders void, reinforcing the court's authority to intervene in such instances.
The resumption of land under Section 3-B cannot be solely based on observations of land lying fallow; substantial evidence of actual non-use for its intended purpose is required.
Settlement authorities cannot override confirmed property rights without lawful authority; Judicial review ensures adherence to due process in land ownership disputes.
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
