SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

ORISSA HIGH COURT
SUBASH CHANDRA PRADHAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF ODISHA – Respondent


Advocates:
['M/S SIDHARTHA MISHRA', '', 'L N RAYATSINGH', 'M L MISHRA', 'M/S V NARASINGH', 'S DAS', 'S DEVI']

14. 18.03.2021

1. Heard Mr. S. Mishra, learned counsel for the Petitioners;

Mr. S. Palit, learned Additional Government Advocate for the

State-Opposite Party Nos.1 to 7, and Mr. V. Narasingh,

learned counsel for Opposite Party No.8.

2. The present petition has been filed as a purported public

interest litigation by five persons claiming to be the residents

of village Muninda in district Puri aggrieved by the

construction of a Kalyan Mandap, which according to them is

taking place on a Gochar land. The second ground on which

they have raised objection is that the Kalyan Mandap is going

to be constructed near a riverbank well as the school situated

near the riverbank.

3. As far as first objection is concerned, in a counter filed to

the rejoinder, the Opposite Parties have enclosed a copy of the

order dated 22nd June 2019, passed by the Collector, Puri de-

reserving the land in question over which the Kalyan Mandap

is being constructed. In other words, the land in question is no

longer a Gochar land and therefore, there can be no objection

to the construction of a Kalyan Mandap thereon. If the

Petitioners are aggrieved by the de-reservation order, it will be

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top