Orissa High Court
WP(C)/25195/2026 of SAROJ KUMAR RATH Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 17 August 2026
of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No. 25195 of 2026 CNR No. ODHC010599432026 Saroj Kumar Rath ..... Petitioner Ms. S. Jena, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Mr. C.K. Pradhan, AGA Mr. S.R. Dash, Advocate on behalf of Mr. B.K. Dash, Sr. Advocate
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No. 25195 of 2026
CNR No. ODHC010599432026
Saroj Kumar Rath
.....
Petitioner
Ms. S. Jena, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha & Ors.
.....
Opposite Parties
Mr. C.K. Pradhan, AGA
Mr. S.R. Dash, Advocate
on behalf of
Mr. B.K. Dash, Sr. Advocate
(OPTCL)
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
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
17.08.2026 Order No. 02
1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Opp. Parties.
3. Petitioner has filed the present writ petition inter alia with the following prayer:- “The Petitioner therefore most humbly prays that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue Rule Nisi calling upon the Opp. Parties to show cause and
(i) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Opposite Parties to remove the obstruction caused to the Petitioners' only approach road to their land under Khata No. 155, Plot No. 734, Mouza-Padiabhanga, Tahasil-Talcher, District-Angul and restore free ingress and egress to the Petitioners' property;
(ii) Direct the Opposite Parties not to proceed with the construction work in a manner that obstructs the
Petitioners' access to their land, or in the alternative, to provide a permanent and motorable alternative approach road;
(iii) Direct the Opposite Parties to pay appropriate compensation for the loss and hardship caused to the Petitioners due to the obstruction of the only access road And if the Opposite parties fail to show cause or show insufficient cause to make the said rule absolute by issuance of writ of mandamus or any other writ (s), order (s), direction (s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper; And/or to pass such other order (s), direction (s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the present case.
And for this act of kindness the petitioner shall as in duty bound ever pray.”
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that though highlighting his grievances, Petitioner has filed a representation at Annexure-2 to the Writ Petition before the Opp. Party No. 2, but till date nothing has been done in the matter. In such background, learned counsel for the Petitioner prays that a direction be issued to Opposite Party No. 2 to take a decision on the above noted Petition within a specific time period.
5. Considering the submissions made and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court directs Opposite Party No. 2 to take a decision on the above noted petition in accordance with law, within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of this order and communicate the result of such exercise to the Petitioner.
5.1. It is however observed that while taking a decision as directed, Opp. Party No. 2 shall give an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner as well as the authorities of OPTCL.
5.2. Any construction made in the meantime shall be subject to final outcome of the decision to be taken by the Collector as directed.
6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of.
(BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY)
Judge Sneha Digitally Signed Signed by: SNEHANJALI PARIDA Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 18-Aug-2026 18:35:45 Signature Not Verified