While adjudicating on the contention that there is a statutory appeal that should be used by the petitioner instead of approaching the writ court, the Orissa High Court noted that it would be great injustice on the petitioner to direct him to approach the civil Court because the appeal, being a continuation of the suit, cannot be adjudicated in the absence of the evidence of the field inquiry report.

Brief Facts:

 The petitioner has filed this writ petition because, by the impugned order dated 22nd February 2001, the lease in respect of the plot allotted to his father was canceled on the ground that it had not been used for the purpose of the lease for residential purposes. It was also contended by the petitioner that they had made a thatched house on the plot which was destroyed by the super Cyclone in October 1999.

The side of State’s side has submitted that by the impugned order dated 22nd February 2001, there was a direction of cancellation of the lease and reverting the land to Government Khata and that a statutory remedy by way of appeal is available to the petitioner and that is why there should not be any interference.

Observations of the Court:

The Hon’ble Court first noted that the inquiry report relied upon in the impugned order is not available, however, according to a previous order, the revenue inspector has submitted a report, according to which the petitioner is still in possession and living in a house with asbestos roof. And the court was of the opinion that the petitioner has continuing cause of action and delay in presenting the writ petition needs to be condoned in accordance with the law laid down in Tukaram Kana Joshi v. M.I.D.C.

Then it was noted that because the basis of the impugned order is not available on record, it is perverse ad it is based on no evidence, it was further noted that it would be great injustice on the petitioner to direct him to approach the civil Court because the appeal, being a continuation of suit, cannot be adjudicated on the absence of the evidence of the field inquiry report.

The Decision of the Court:

The impugned order was set aside and quashed and the writ petition was disposed of.

Case Title: Bhagirathi Rout v. State of Odisha and others

Coram: Justice Arindam Sinha; Justice Sanjay Kumar Mishra

Case No.: W.P.(C). No. 28877 of 2022

Advocates for the Petitioners:Mr. Kishore Chandra Rajguru, Advocate

Advocate for the Respondents:Mr. A.K. Sharma, AGA

Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com

Picture Source :

 
Mansha