Orissa High Court
WP(C)/25634/2026 of AMARJYOTI ROY Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 2 September 2026
of 2. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.25634 of 2026 CNR No. ODHC010595502026 Amarjyoti Roy ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. Mr. Pranab Kumar Ghose -versus- State of Odisha & others ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Mr. D. Lenka, AGA CORAM: MR. JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA
Page 1 of 2.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.25634 of 2026
CNR No. ODHC010595502026
Amarjyoti Roy
.....
Petitioner
Represented by Adv.
Mr. Pranab Kumar
Ghose
-versus-
State of Odisha & others
.....
Opposite Parties
Represented by
Mr. D. Lenka, AGA
CORAM:
MR. JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
02.09.2026
1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State.
3. Mr. S.S. Dash, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was granted plot of land measuring 50ft x 75ft with area Ac.0.086 dec. However, in the ROR the extent of land was mentioned as Ac. 0.075 dec.
4. By order dated 13.03.2018 the Member, Board of Revenue allowed the claim of the petitioner, inter alia, observing as follows:- “However, regarding the claim for enhancing the shortfall in area from Ac. 0.075 dec. to 0.081 dec. the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar is required to conduct a field enquiry in presence of Order No.
1. Page 2 of 2. G.A. Department representative, verify the possession of the present petitioner and also extract the area of Hat Plot No. 1377 in the hal map. If on field measurement and map area extraction the claim of area by the present petitioner is found correct then the area of the Hal Plot No.1377 is to be corrected accordingly by deleting the same from Hal Khata No. 2333 of Mouza- Ghatikia and be recorded in favour of the petitioner, Amarjyoti Roy, S/o Late Bhagabat Prasad Roy in "stitiban" status with classification Gharabari" instead of classification “Patita”
5. It is the grievance of the petitioner that despite such clear direction, no action has been taken by the Tahasildar till date.
6. Considering the limited grievance, the writ petition is disposed of directing the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar to act upon the directions of the Board of Revenue without any further delay and in any case not later than two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order by the petitioner. The Tahasildar shall grant an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner enabling him to submit documents in his favour before disposing of the case.
7. It goes without saying that in course of verification of records as well as the field position, the Tahasildar shall take note of the document pertaining to handing over of lease land to the petitioner enclosed as Annexure-5 to the writ petition.
(Sashikanta Mishra) Judge
BC TUDU Digitally Signed Signed by: BHIGAL CHANDRA TUDU Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack Date: 02-Sep-2026 17:57:34 Signature Not Verified