Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
K.R. MOHAPATRA, SAVITRI RATHO
Simple Sujata Mishra – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner claims ownership of land. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. respondents argue against writ petition's maintainability. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court issues order for individual case considerations. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. settlement authority's order deemed without jurisdiction. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 5. order to correct land records in favor of petitioner. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
JUDGMENT :
2. The Petitioner in this writ petition seeks to assail the order dated 6th August, 2013 (Annexure-5) passed by the Additional Sub-Collector-cum-Settlement Officer, Bhubaneswar in Appeal Case No.4163 of 2013.
3.1 When the matter stood thus, suo motu Revision Case No.841 of 1998 was initiated by learned Additional District Magistrate, Bhubaneswar against the lessee, namely, Pitabasa Behera and the lease granted in his favour was cancelled vide order dated 28th July, 1998. Although the Petitioner was the rightful owner in possession over the case land, but she was not served with notice of the aforesaid suo motu revision case initiated under Section 7 -A(3) of the Odisha Government Land Settlement Act, 1962 (for brevity ‘the OGLS Act’). Thus, the Petitioner being aggrieved, filed W.P.(C) No.4824 of 2023 along with Smt
An order made without jurisdiction is void and cannot be sustained; ownership rights established must be recognized despite conflicting authority actions.
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.
A writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 is maintainable when statutory authorities act without jurisdiction, allowing for correction of records even after finalization.
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.
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
