Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
SANJEEB K. PANIGRAHI
Sk. Farid – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's premise seek clarification related to land rights. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. petitioner asserts long possession and seeks land settlement. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court reviews statutory framework for eviction processes. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. court concludes petitioner's rights do not override eviction laws. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. writ petition dismissed based on established statutory premises. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
JUDGMENT :
S.K. Panigrahi, J.
1. The Petitioner, by filing the present Writ Petition, seeks quashing of the order dated 19.03.2025 passed by the learned Additional District Judge-cum-Appellate Authority, Bhubaneswar, affirming the order dated 10.01.2024 passed in A.G. (Audit-1)/EC/Evic/2023-24 under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 by the Senior Deputy Accountant General (Admin)-cum-Estate Officer.
2. The Petitioner has also sought a direction upon the Opposite Parties to settle the land in his favour in respect of Plot No. 249, Khata No. 76 of Mouza-Bhouma Nagar under Bhubaneswar Tahasil, District Khordha.
I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE
3. The brief facts of the case are as follows:
(i) The petitioner has been carrying
Unauthorized occupation of public premises does not confer legal rights; eviction proceedings must adhere to statutory requirements, and alleged violations of natural justice must be substantiated.
Adverse possession claims over government land require substantial evidence; mere long-standing possession does not confer title, particularly where public interest is involved.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the definition of public premises under the U.P. Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1972 and the re....
The necessity for eviction must be justified in addition to establishing unauthorized occupation under the Public Premises Act, as reaffirmed by prior judicial interpretations.
The court emphasized that eviction under the Public Premises Act requires subjective satisfaction of unauthorized occupation, ensuring fairness in administrative actions.
PP Act prevails over state rent acts for evicting unauthorized occupants from public premises, including pre-existing tenancies post-acquisition; unauthorized assignment, decades-long rent default, a....
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
