Writ courts will not intervene in eviction disputes lacking legal entitlement; mere assertions of property rights without proof do not justify relief against eviction threats.

JUDGMENT :

SANJEEB K. PANIGRAHI, J.

1. The petitioner, in the present Writ Petition, assails the action of the opposite parties in initiating proceedings to evict the petitioner from the land appertaining to Plot No. 360 under Khata No.189 situated in Mouza Debendrapur, measuring Ac. 0.11 dec., without adherence to due process of law, notwithstanding the petitioner’s claim that the case land stands allotted in his favour.

I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE:

2. Succinctly put, the facts of the case as narrated by the petitioner are as follows:

(i) The petitioner is in occupation of the land appertaining to Plot No. 360 under Khata No. 189, measuring Ac. 0.11 dec., situated in Mouza Debendrapur, and has been residing thereon along with his family members. The kisam of the land is recorded as Sarada-III. The said land stood recorded in the names of Rashbihari Adhya and Bipinbehari Adhya.

(ii) In the year 2016, the Tahasildar issued notice to the petitioner in O.A. Case No. 1 of 2016, calling upon him to appear in connection with the Bebandobasta status of the land, on the ground that the petitioner had remained in possession thereof after vesting of the same in the Government under the provisions of the O.E.A. Act.

(iii) The petitioner appeared before the Tahasildar on the date fixed and submitted that he was in occupation of the land as a landless person and prayed for settlement thereof in his favour.

(iv) Subsequently, the Government of Odisha, through the Housing and Urban Development Department, allotted the land in question in favour of the petitioner under the Odisha Land Rights to Slum Dwellers Act, 2017, having regard to the petitioner’s status as a landless person. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner was assigned House No. DP70304 under Ward No. 27.

(v) While the matter stood thus, opposite party Nos. 4 and 5, in coordination with opposite party No. 6, threatened to evict the petitioner from the land in question and directed him to vacate the same without disclosing any reasons therefor.

(vi) Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.

II. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER:

3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner earnestly made the following submissions in support of his contentions:

(i) The petitioner submitted that he has been in occupation of the land in question for more than thirty years and has been residing thereon along with his family members.

(ii) The petitioner submitted that while he continued to be in peaceful possession of the land in question, opposite party Nos. 4 and 5, in coordination with opposite party No. 6, threatened him with eviction therefrom, despite his status as a landless person having been recognised under the Odisha Land Rights to Slum Dwellers Act, 2017.

(iii) The petitioner submitted that no reasons were assigned for the threat of eviction or for directing him to vacate the land forthwith, and that he was merely asked to vacate the same. He further contended that in the absence of any lawful basis or adherence to due process of law, the opposite parties have no authority to evict him.

(iv) The petitioner submitted that the right to property is a constitutional right and cannot be taken away except by authority of law. He further contended that the opp