Advocates:
['M/S S D DAS', '', 'M PANDA', 'M M SWAIN', 'H MOHANTY', 'H K BEHERA', 'P K KHUNTIA', 'S BISWAL', 'S DAS']

Page 1 of 7

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

RSA No.24 of 2014

Orissa Communist Party,

represented through its President

Ajeya Rout

….

Appellant

Mr.S.D. Das, Sr. Advocate

-versus-

State of Orissa & Others

….

Respondents

Mr.G.N.Rout

ASC

CORAM:

MR. JUSTICE D.DASH

Order

No.

ORDER

07.12.2021

04.

1.

This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement

(Virtual/Physical Mode).

2.

The Appellant, by filing this Appeal under section 100 of

the Civil Procedure Code (for short, ‘the Code’), has assailed the

judgment dated 06.01.2004 passed by the learned Additional

District Judge, Bhubaneswar in R.F.A. No.5/57 of 2012/2008.

By the said judgment, while dismissing the First Appeal

filed by present Appellant under Section 96 of the Code in

challenging the judgment and decree dated 19.09.2008 and

04.10.2008 respectively passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior

Division, Bhubaneswar in C.S. No.521 of 2005 dismissing the suit

filed by it as Plaintiff has failed to get any such relief therein.

// 2 //

Page 2 of 7

3.

For the sake of convenience, in order to avoid confusion

and bring in clarity, the parties hereinafter have been referred to, as

they have been arraigned in the Suit.

4.

The Plaintiff, a registered Regional Political Party with the

activities as such in the State, by filing the suit, has impeached the

order of the Government in G.A. Department communicated vide

letter no.10912 dated 01.08.2000 asserting it to be perspective,

void, nonest and contrary to the statutory law. With such prayer,

the Plaintiff has prayed for declaring the order as to the refusal on

the part of the Defendants-State to renew the license of the quarter

at Bhubaneswar as illegal, bad, discriminatory and revocable;

further prayer has also been made to direct the Defendants-State to

renew the license and deliver possession of the same to the Plaintiff

in cases he in the meantime is dispossessed. The suit with the

above prayer is based on the fact that the Defendants-State had

allotted a quarter bearing 5/1, Type-VI-B in Unit-III, Bhubaneswar

to the Plaintiff for its office to function therein for a period of three

years. The deed of agreement to that effect had been executed on

24.05.1997 and the Plaintiff with effect from 27.05.1997 occupied

the said quarter and started to run its office therein. Rent as fixed

was being paid. Thus being the State continuing, it is said that

although the license was to be automatically renewed, the

Defendants-State did not communicate anything as regards said

renewal. So, the Plaintiff, while continuing to pay the rent, wrote a

letter on 12.07.2000 to the Defendants-State making a request for

renewal of the license. After five years, on 27.06.2005, the

Defendants-State intimated the Plaintiff that he has no further right

to occupy the said quarter allotted to it and as the party in question

// 3 //

Page 3 of 7

does not have the representation in 13^th Assembly, which is

mandatory as per the policy for allotment of quarter to the Regional

Political Party. After issuing the said letter, no rent was received

from the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff then made a request for revocation

of the said letter of the Defendants-State. However, the

Defendants-State, in turn, proceeded to initiate a proceeding for

eviction of the Plaintiff from the said allotted quarter terming the

occupation of the said quarter by the Plaintiff as unauthorized

under the provision of Orissa Public Premises (Eviction of

Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1972 (in short, ‘the Act of 1972’)

vide OPP Case No.123 of 2005. The Plaintiff, entering appearance,

submitted its representation for renewal of the license inter alia

pleading therein that the G.A. letter no.0912 dated 01.08.2000 is

perspective in its effect and non-renewal of the license for the

qua