Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
SASHIKANTA MISHRA
Krushna Chandra Mohapatra (dead). Represented Through L.Rs – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge against encroachment removal in cuttack (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. opposition claims private ownership (Para 4) |
| 3. petitioner's argument on compliance with prior orders (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. dispute involves questions of fact requiring civil court action (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. writ court should refrain from interfering due to disputed facts (Para 13 , 14) |
ORDER :
SASHIKANTA MISHRA, J.
The petitioners seek to challenge the inaction of Opposite Party Nos.2 to 4, namely, Cuttack Development Authority (C.D.A.), Planning Member/Secretary, CDA and Enforcement Officer, CDA respectively in the matter of removal of encroachment allegedly made by the private opposite parties over Plot Nos.602 and 606 under Mouza–Nuapada in Cuttack despite fresh measurement conducted pursuant to the directions of this Court in W.P.(C) No.33429 of 2020 and W.P.(C) No.21106 of 2023.
2. Since both the writ petitions involve common facts, they were heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgment. For the sake of convenience, the facts of W.P.(C) No.29828 of 2024 are referred to.
3. The case of the petitioners, in brief, is that Opposite Party Nos.5 to 9 made unauthorized constru
The court declines to issue a writ directing removal of encroachments, emphasizing that disputed factual questions are to be resolved by the Civil Court.
encroachment of Land - photographs cannot give clear picture about the fact that whether road has been encroached upon or not and to what extent it is encroached upon and the same is encroached upon ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need to conduct a survey to identify encroachments on public lands and to take appropriate action for their removal under the relevant laws.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of substantial evidence to support claims of encroachment. The judgment emphasizes the importance of legal proceedings under the We....
The High Court affirmed that findings of fact by lower courts cannot be interfered with unless they are manifestly erroneous or based on inadmissible evidence under Section 100 of CPC.
The court affirmed that the petitioners failed to prove any right, title, or interest over the public land, validating the encroachment proceedings under the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act.
Authorities are required to assess encroachment claims and act within legal frameworks, ensuring fair hearings.
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
