ORISSA HIGH COURT : CUTTACK
ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA, J.
Pradip Mohanty - Petitioner
Vs.
State of Odisha & Others - Opposite Parties
WP(C) No.6747 of 2025
Decided On : 19-03-2025
JUDGMENT :
ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA, J.
1. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of the India, 1950 has been filed by the petitioner praying for quashing (setting aside) an order dated 22.03.2022 (Annexure 1) passed in Appeal Case No.310 of 2016 by the Additional Sub Collector, Bhubaneswar (Opposite Party No.3) and to issue a writ of mandamus directing the Assistant Settlement Officer (O.P. No.4) to record the case land i.e. A0.102 decimals of Sabik Plot No.51/1442 under Sabik Khata No.233/142 in Mouja Sampur jointly in the name of the petitioner along with his brother and sister and to grant other reliefs in his favour, to which, he (petitioner) is entitled under law.
2. The case of the petitioner is that, one Priyambada Mohanty W/o-Bhava Krushna Mohanty of Udyan Marg Bhubaneswar under Capital Police Station in the district of Puri (at present in the District of Khordha) was the owner of the property vide Sabik Plot No.51/1442, A2.00 Decimals under Sabik Khata No.233/142 in Mouja Sampur under Chandaka Police Station in the District of Puri (at present in the District of Khordha).
3. The said A2.00 Decimals of land of Sabik Plot No.51/1442 under Sabik Khata No.233/142 in Mouja Sampur was settled in the name of Priyambada Mohanty in the year 1973 on the basis of an order passed by the competent revenue authority in W.L.L. case No.389 of 1971.
4. On the basis of above lawful settlement of A2.00 Decimals of land vide Sabik Plot No.51/1442 under Sabik Khata No.233/142 in Mouja Sampur through W.L.L. case No.389 of 1971 in the name of Priyambada Mohanty, she (Priyambada Mohanty) became the exclusive owner of the said land and possessed the same exclusively paying rent for the same to the Government/State.
5. While, Priyambada Mohanty was the exclusive owner and in possession over the above A2.00 Decimals of land of Sabik Plot No.51/1442 in Mouja Sampur, she (Priyambada Mohanty) was interested to sell A0.102 decimals of land out of her above A2.00 Decimals of land of Sabik Plot No.51/1442 for a consideration of Rs.800/- in order to meet her legal necessities, to which, the mother of the petitioner i.e. Sarat Prava Mohanty accepted and agreed to purchase on payment of the above consideration amount. Then, the owner of the property i.e. Priyambada Mohanty sought for permission as required under law from the competent revenue authority for selling her above A0.102 decimals of land out of A2.00 Decimals vide Sabik Plot No.51/1442 to the mother of the petitioner i.e. Sarat Prava Mohanty by filing Misc. Case No.40 of 1980. As per order dated 08.05.1980 passed in that Misc. Case No.40 of 1980, the Revenue Authorities granted permission in favour of Priyambada Mohanty to sell the above A0.102 decimals of land out of the A2.00 Decimals of land of Sabik Plot No.51/1442 to Sarat Prava Mohanty and issued such permission to the applicant/owner Priyambada Mohanty through memo No.2154.
6. Therefore, on the basis of the aforesaid lawful permission granted by the appropriate Revenue Authroities as per Order dated 08.05.1980 passed in Misc. Case No.40 of 1980, Priyambada Mohanty sold her A0.102 decimals of land out of the above A2.00 Decimals of land in Sabik Plot No.51/1442 under Sabik Khata No.233/142 in Mouja Sampur to the mother of the petitioner i.e. Sarat Prava Mohanty by executing and registering sale deed No.3559 dated 14.05.1980 receiving due consideration amount thereof i.e. Rs.800/- from her (Sarat Prava Mohanty) and delivered possession thereof.
7. Accordingly, since 14.05.1980 the mother of the petitioner i.e. Sarat Prava Mohanty being the exclusive owner of her above purchased A0.102 decimals of Sabik Plot No.51/1442 possessed the same exclusively. Subsequent thereto, mother of the petitioner i.e. Sarat Prava Mohanty died leaving behind the petitioner, his younger brother Prakash Chandra Mohanty and his sister Prativa Mohanty as her successors. For which, the aforesaid purchased A0.102 decimals of Sabik Plot No.51/1442 i
Settlement authorities lack jurisdiction to declare a sale deed void; unchallenged orders remain valid until modified by a competent authority.
The court confirmed that established land settlements must be respected and that authorities cannot alter classifications of land previously settled without valid justification under law.
The court emphasized the importance of providing an opportunity to be heard in settlement processes and upheld the validity of the documents presented by the petitioners.
Settlement authorities' orders do not confer or extinguish title to property; parties retain the right to establish ownership through legal proceedings.
Settlement authorities cannot alter confirmed land assignments without legal basis, emphasizing the need to respect prior land grants and judicial confirmations.
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.
Settlement authorities cannot override confirmed property rights without lawful authority; Judicial review ensures adherence to due process in land ownership disputes.
An order made without jurisdiction is void and cannot be sustained; ownership rights established must be recognized despite conflicting authority actions.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.