IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WA No.851 of 2025
Bhaskar Rout … Appellant
Mr. Prafulla Kumar Rath Senior Advocate along with
Mr. Prasanta Kumar Satapathy, Advocate
-Versus-
State of Odisha and others … Respondents
Mr. Debashis Tripathy, Additional Government Advocate
CORAM:
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN
ORDER
Order No. 12.09.2025
04. W.A. No.851 of 2025 & I.A. No.2200 of 2025
1. The instant writ appeal arises from the judgment and
order dated 26.03.2025 passed in W.P.(C) No.35944 of 2021
on multiple grounds, including that the Single Bench did not
notice the discrepancies in the facts and proceeded on the
ipse dixit of the same and therefore, the order impugned is an
outcome of non-application of mind.
2. The petitioner was allotted a tenement being an employee
of the industrial organization, which was subsequently laid
off and the order was challenged before the appropriate
forum and ultimately culminated into by setting aside and/or
quashing thereof. Subsequently, a scheme was framed for
settlement of the tenement in favour of the occupants; yet to
Page 1 of 3
deprive the right of the petitioner, the same was allotted to
the opposite party no.5. The said allotment was challenged
and was subsequently quashed and set aside in the
proceeding, but subsequent thereto, in terms of the order
passed in a writ petition being W.P.(C) No.3274 of 2005, the
Tenement Committee held that the petitioner’s right in
respect of the tenement is unjustified and therefore, he should
be directed to vacate the same as an unauthorized occupant.
The decision of the Committee was challenged before this
Court in the said writ petition. It is pointed out that the
Committee proceeded on the basis of the fact that the
opposite party no.5 is in occupation of the tenement since
1985, when the record would reveal that his application for
allotment of a tenement was taken out in the year1988 and
therefore, the very basis of the resolution and/or the steps
having taken on the basis thereon is factually incorrect and
therefore, the decision is unsustainable and liable to be
quashed.
3. Taking into account the application seeking an allotment
as well as the letter of allotment, we find that the application
was taken out by the opposite party no.5 for allotment of the
tenement in the year 1988 and therefore, the finding that he is
in occupation since 1985 does not appear to be correct. We,
thus, find a prima facie case having made out for the simple
reason that the petitioner is put at the risk of being evicted
from the said tenement. We, therefore, restrain the authorities
from taking any steps or further steps in removing and/or
Page 2 of 3
ousting the petitioner from the said tenement being the
subject matter of the instant writ appeal for a period of ten
weeks from date or until further orders, whichever is earlier.
4. Since Mr. Debashis Tripathy, learned Additional
Government Advocate appears and waives issue of notice on
behalf of the opposite party nos. 1 to 4, adequate numbers of
copies of the writ appeal be served on him within three
working days.
5. Issue notice to the opposite party no.5 by Registered
Post/Speed Post with A.D., requisites for which shall be filed
within three working days. In the event of furnishing such
requisites within the period stipulated, the Office shall send
the notice to the said opposite party by fixing a short
returnable date.
6. List this matter on 24th October, 2025.
(Harish Tandon)
Chief Justice
(M.S. Raman)
Judge
Aswini
Signature Not
Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: ASWINI KUMAR
SETHY
Designation: Personal Assistant
(Secretary-in-Charge)
Reason: Authentication
Location: ORISSA HIGH
COURT, CUTTACK
Date: 15-Sep-2025 11:31:34
Page 3 of 3