IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P. (C) No. 13201 of 2025 Kailash Chandra Barik & another …. Petitioners Mr. Somanath Nanda, Advocate -versus-

State of Odisha & Others …. Opp. Parties Mr. Satyabrata Mohanty, AGA CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH

ORDER

Order No. 13.05.2025

01. 1. By means of this writ application, the Petitioners have prayed for a direction to the Opposite Parties, in particular Opp.Party Nos.3 and 4, i.e. B.D.O., Sukinda and Jr. Engineer, Sukinda respectively, not to make any further illegal additions/alterations by constructing further over the building situated over the suit schedule property in furtherance of the Work Order under Annexure-2 series.

2. As submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioners, the disputed land in question, of which the Record of Rights (ROR) stands recorded in the name of the Petitioners, has been published on 02.07.1992. However, in the remark column of the ROR, the note of possession is found reflected in the name of Kaitha Uchha Prathamika Vidyalaya. It is also admitted in the writ application that the said school is running over the disputed plot of land in question since long. The Petitioners are showing their concern at this stage with regard to further additions/ alterations/construction to have been undertaken for the school by the order of the BDO, Sukinda dated 27.02.2024, wherein a direction has been issued to the Jr. Engineer, Sukinda to execute the construction work of the building within 30 days. Hence, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioners that, the authorities concerned be issued with notice by this Court.

3. On the basis of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the Petitioners and having regard to the averments made in the writ application, though the Record of Rights (ROR) in respect of the suit land stands recorded in the name of the Petitioners, admittedly the land is under possession of Banadurga Nodal Upper Primary School, Kaitha, wherein the school is running over the said land since long, by putting construction of the school building over the same. The alleged direction issued by the BDO, Sukinda for execution of the work order is of dated 16.02.2024, and, in the meanwhile, more than a year has elapsed. Hence, it is difficult to say if construction work has already commenced or completed in the meanwhile in absence of a definite case of the petitioners.

4. In view of the contentions raised in the writ petition and the admitted case of the Petitioners, the grievance raised in the writ petition needs to be ascertained in respect of the right, title and interest of the Petitioners over the suit land through a declaration by the competent Court of civil nature. Further, the possession of the land being not in favour of the Petitioners, they are also required to get the recovery thereof. Since disputed question of facts involve with regard to the ownership of the Petitioners over the land in question, which is required to be resolved in a given forum, the relief claimed by the Petitioners in the present writ petition is not maintainable. However, in the event the Petitioners move before the appropriate court of law for declaration of their right, title, interest and recovery of possession, they may have the liberty to move the said Court for an interlocutory order to preventing / directing the Opp. Parties / authorities not to proceed further in the construction work, if any in question, which, the Court concerned shall deal with in accordance with law.

5. In view of the above discussion, the writ petition stands disposed of as not maintainable.

(Chittaranjan Dash)

Judge S.K. Parida Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SAMIR KUMAR PARIDA Designation: ADR-cum-Addl. Principal Secretary Reason: Authentic Copy Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK Date: 14-May-2025 16:17:56