CUTTACK, India, May 26 -- Orissa High Court issued the following order on April 23:
1. The petitioner assails the order dated 22.09.2025 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Additional Revision Court-IV, Odisha, Bhubaneswar in OSS Case No.664 of 2022 in dismissing the said case filed by him.
2. Facts of the case, briefly stated, are that one Radhu Nayak was the recorded tenant and owner in possession of land measuring Ac.1.00 dec. pertaining to Sabik Plot No. 552/774 under Sabik Khata No. 140/72 in Mouza Bhola under Chandaka Police Station. Said land corresponds to Hal Plot Nos. 814 and 815 under Hal Khata No. 305. The land was leased out to Radhu Nayak as per order passed in Waste Land Lease Case No. 137/68-69 by the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar. During subsistence of the lease, Radhu Nayak sold portions of the land to the petitioner by executing two registered sale deeds being RSD No. 2681 dated 27.05.1998 and RSD No. 2682, also dated 27.05.1998, each for Ac.0.62 dec.. The petitioner after purchase, is continuing to be the owner in possession of the case land. During the last settlement operation, the draft record of rights and Yadast was prepared in the name of the petitioner acknowledging his ownership and possession over the case land. The Asst. Settlement Officer, Rental Colony, Bhubaneswar initiated a suo motu proceeding being Objection Case No. 5811/575 of 2012. By order dated 11.12.2012, the objection case was disposed of refusing to acknowledge the petitioner's claim over the case land and by directing the same to be recorded in the name of State as Abada Jogya Anabadi. The petitioner challenged such order before this Court in W.P.(C) No. 28250 of 2013. By order dated 04.05.2022, this Court disposed of the writ application directing the petitioner to prefer revision under Section 15(b) of the Odisha Survey and Settlement Act against the impugned order. As such, the petitioner filed the aforementioned revision.
3. By order dated 06.09.2024, the revision was rejected on the ground that in the absence of certified copy of the waste land lease and Hal Sabik index, the flow of title is not established. It was thus held that the petitioner has no valid title. It was also held that it was an attempt to grab government land. The petitioner challenged such order before this Court in W.P.(C) No. 28753 of 2022 inter alia, contending that by letter dated 04.05.2005, the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar had stated that though the WL Case record is not readily available but upon perusal of the relevant Khata, the subsistence of the lease in favour of the original lessee was proved. By order dated 11.08.2025, this Court set aside the order of the revisional Court and remitted the matter for fresh consideration by taking note of the aforesaid letter of the Tahasildar and by calling for the records of the WL Case. The Revision was thus heard again but by order passed on 22.09.2025, it was dismissed by holding that the petitioner has no valid title and that it was an attempt made by him to grab government land by misleading the revisional Court. Said order is impugned.
*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=A9S7c5LDIsB6RXaCf816x8oHLWBkUch8RodgrW3jOIhfBnJbwoxBtYx3L0Pb0YJA&caseno=WP(C)/34076/2025&cCode=1&cino=ODHC010848742025&state_code=11&appFlag=)
Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.
