The statutory appeal under the Odisha Municipal Act must be decided by the Municipal Council, as decisions by the Chairperson alone are not valid.

JUDGMENT :

BISWANATH RATH, J.

1. This Writ Petition involves the following prayer:

“The petitioner therefore prays that the Honourable Court be pleased to admit this application and after hearing the petitioner’s advocate issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other suitable writ, quashing the order dated 18.01.2023 passed by the Jajpur Municipal Council in Appeal No.01/2022 conforming the order dated 04.07.2022 passed by the Executive Officer, Jajpur Municipality, Jajpur through a Letter No.2479/04.07.2022 vide Annexure-12 and Annexure-9;

And/or pass any other order(s)/direction(s) as this Honourable Court thinks just and proper;

And for this act of kindness the petitioners as in duty bound shall ever pray.”

2. This case has checkered background even in disposal of three earlier Writ Petitions vide W.P.(C) No.26995 of 2022, W.P.(C) No.18985 of 2022 and W.P.(C) No.11254 of 2022. This is in the fourth round of litigation. Undisputedly there has been a notice for taking out the un-authorized construction, however based on a response to the notice, there has been a decision by the Executive Officer, Jajpur Municipality in declining the request of the Petitioner, resulting filing of Appeal No.01 of 2022. In disposal of the Appeal in the involvement of the Petitioner finalizing the order at Annexure-12, Appeal No.1 of 2022 has come to be rejected, giving rise to the filing of the Writ Petition.

3. Even though the Writ Petition involves several grounds, Mr.Nayak, learned counsel for the Petitioner however confines his submission that ultimately there is non-consideration of the case of the Petitioner made out through paragraphs-4, 5 and 6 of the memorandum of Appeal as well as grounds- b, c and d in giving out the result in the statutory Appeal.

4. Taking this Court to the pleadings through paragraphs-4 to 7 and the grounds-b to d, Mr.Nayak, learned counsel for the Petitioner reading together with the impugned order herein vide Annexure-12 contended that there has been no attending to such grounds at all by the Appellate Authority. Mr.Nayak, therefore seeks interference in the order and at least remitting the same for fresh disposal of the Writ Petition.

5. Mr.Nayak, learned counsel here also in reference to the last direction of this Court in disposal of W.P.(C) No.26995 of 2022 submitted that there was earlier remand of the Appeal proceeding on the reason find place in paragraph-6 of the disposed of Writ Petition. Further for there is pendency of a civil suit but not in the involvement of Municipality involved, Mr.Nayak, learned counsel submits for there is status quo order operating involving very same land being passed by a civil court, the Municipality is required to await final outcome in such proceeding.

6. Mr.Nayak, learned counsel appearing for the Jajpur Municipality however in his opposition attempted to justify the impugned order. In reading the Appeal order together with the direction of this Court in the earlier disposal of the Writ Petitions attempted to support the impugned order on the premises that there has been consideration of the entire case of the Petitioner also keeping in view the direction of this Court in the above discussed Writ Petition. However, on reading entire Appeal order, Mr.Nayak could not be able to demonstrate as to the Appellate Authority attending to the plea by the Petitioner in paragraphs-4 to 7 in the memorandum of Appeal. Mr. Nayak, also contends that for public interest involved, there is urgent need in taking possession of the disputed land and pendency of civil suit should not affect the public exigency.

7. Considering the rival contentions of the Parties and ke