Orissa High Court
Laxmidhar Swain & Others vs State Of Odisha And Others …. Opp. … on 31 March, 2026
Author: K.R. Mohapatra
Bench: K.R. Mohapatra
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY
Reason: Authentication
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK
Date: 02-Apr-2026 11:52:29
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No. 6135 OF 2026
Laxmidhar Swain & others .... Petitioner
Mr. Gajendranath Rout, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opp. Parties
Mr. Swayambhu Mishra,
Addl. Standing Counsel
CORAM:
JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA
ORDER
Order No. 31.03.2026
01. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. The petitioners in this writ application seek to challenge the
initiation of proceedings against them under the provisions of the
Orissa Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act,
1972 (for brevity, ‘the Act’).
3. Mr. Rout, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioners are the street vendors earning their livelihood at
different places in Konark. He further submits that proceedings
under Section 4(1) of the Act, being Case Nos.180 of 2025, 181 of
2025, 182 of 2025, 183 of 2025, have been initiated against the
petitioners alleging unauthorized occupation. It is further submitted
that the petitioners have already filed their respective show cause
replies before the Authority, raising objections as to the
maintainability of the proceedings under Annexure-8 series. He,
therefore, submits that the Authority under the Act ought to decide
Page 1 of 2
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY
Reason: Authentication
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK
Date: 02-Apr-2026 11:52:29
the issue of maintainability of the proceedings at the first instance
before going into the merit of the cases.
4. Mr. Mishra, learned Addl. Standing Counsel submits that
since the petitioner have already filed their respective objections in
the aforesaid eviction proceedings, it is expected that the Authority
under the Act shall consider and dispose of the same in accordance
with law. He further contends that the present writ application is
pre-mature.
5. Taking note of the submissions made by the learned counsel
for the respective parties, this Court disposes of the writ application
with a direction to the Tahasildar -cum- Estate Officer, Gop,
opposite party no.4 before whom the aforesaid proceedings under
the Act are pending, to consider the objections filed by the
petitioners, both on the question of maintainability as well as on
merits, after affording them an opportunity of hearing and pass
reasoned orders in accordance with law in the aforesaid cases.
(K.R. Mohapatra)
Judge
(S.K. Mishra)
Judge
PKSahoo
Page 2 of 2