Judicial orders must be strictly followed by administrative officers, and deviations can result in quashing such orders.

JUDGMENT :

ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA, J.

1. This writ petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the petitioner praying for quashing the impugned order dated 15.03.2024 (Annexure-7) passed in Misc. Case No.270 of 2023 by the Assistant Settlement Officer, Rental Colony, Bhubaneswar (Opp. Party No.4).

2. Heard from the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State.

3. The factual backgrounds of this writ petition which prompted the petitioner for filing of the same is that, as per the directions given by this Court in the final order dated 24.01.2023 passed in WPC No.2231 of 2014, the petitioner approached the Assistant Settlement Officer, Rental Colony, Bhubaneswar office at Cuttack (Opp. Party No.4) for recording the case land in her name.

Because, in the said final order dated 24.01.2023 passed in WP(C) No.2231 of 2014, this Court had directed to the Assistant Settlement Officer, Rental Colony, Bhubaneswar office at Cuttack (Opp. Party No.4) to record the case land in the name of the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of 8 weeks from the date of such order, because, the entry made in the Final R.o.R of the case land in the name of Government was cancelled by the said order and direction was given to the Assistant Settlement Officer, Rental Colony, Bhubaneswar (Opp. Party No.4) to proceed to record the case land in favour of the petitioner stating that, “the said directions will be carried out within the period of 4 months from the date of said order clarifying that, the said order will not prevent the Government from exercising powers under Section 3-B of the OGLS Act, 1962 in accordance with law.”

4. On the basis of the said final order dated 24.01.2023 passed in WP(C) No.2231 of 2014, the Assistant Settlement Officer, Rental Colony, Bhubaneswar office at Cuttack (Opp. Party No.4) disposed of the Misc. Case No.270 of 2023 on dated 15.03.2024 forwarding the matter to the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar for examination of the aspects of the lease land stating that, the Tahasildar shall keep in mind of the terms of directions of the High Court while adjudicating the fact in issue.

5. The above order dated 24.01.2023 of this Court in WP(C) No.2231 of 2014 is clearly and unambiguously going to show that, directions were given to the Assistant Settlement Officer, Rental Colony, Bhubaneswar office at Cuttack (Opp. Party No.4) to record the case land in favour of the petitioner giving liberty to the Government for exercising its power under Section 3-B of the OGLS Act, 1962 in accordance with law.

Whereas, the Assistant Settlement Officer, Rental Colony, Bhubaneswar office at Cuttack (Opp. Party No.4) instead of implementing the above directions of this Court given in the order dated 24.01.2023 passed in WP(C) No.2231 of 2014 for recording of the case land in favour of the petitioner, the Assistant Settlement Officer, Rental Colony, Bhubaneswar office at Cuttack (Opp. Party No.4) forwarded the matter to the Tahasildar for the purposes as stated above, those are otherwise than the directions of this Court in WP(C) No.2231 of 2014.

For which, the impugned order dated 15.03.2024 (Annexure-7) passed by the Assistant Settlement Officer, Rental Colony, Bhubaneswar office at Cuttack (Opp. Party No.4) is not in conformity with the directions given in WP(C) No.2231 of 2014 on dated 24.01.2023 by this Court.

6. When the order dated 15.03.2024 passed in Misc. Case No.270 of 2023 by the Assistant Settlement Officer, Rental Colony, Bhubaneswar offic