WP(C)/22211/2026 of CHATURBHUJA NIRMAN BUILDER AND DEVELOPER, BMC PANCHDEEP COMPLEX, BHUBANESWAR Vs AKHIL KUMAR SAHOO on 28 July 2026

ORDER

Order No.

28.07.2026

02. (Through hybrid Mode)

1. Perused the report of the Assistant Registrar-cum-ASR & OC dated 27.07.2026. Although he has begged apology for committing error, but his report does not address the query of the Court made on 27.07.2026.

2. Similarly, the reports of the Superintendent, Writ Branch-II and the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) do not answer the query of the Court.

3. Hence further report should be submitted by the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) so that the Court can ascertain from the Stamp Report, itself if copy has been served in the Office of the learned Advocate General, instead of adjourning the case, seeking reports from the Registry.

4. Heard Mr. B.S. Tripathy, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and Mr. Bibekananda Nayak, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the State.

5. This writ petition has been filed with the following prayers: “On the facts and in the circumstances, the petitioner most humbly prays that this Hon'ble Court be graciously pleased to;

(i) quash the impugned Certificate Case No.5/2025 in Annexure-5 as well as the impugned order dt.23.06.2026 of the Certificate Officer/OP.No.2 in Annexure-6 by holding the same as bad, illegal and contrary to Section- 2(g), 3 and 4 of the OPDR Act and thereby

(ii) direct the OP No.2-Certificate Officer- cum-Addl. Dist. Magistrate, Bhubaneswar not to proceed further in the said impugned Certificate Case No.5/2025 in Annexure-5

OR in the alternate to allow the petitioner at least three months time to file its' show-cause and petition under Sec-8 of OPDR Act denying liability and thereafter to consider the matter on merits;

(iii) pass such other order as may be deemed fit and proper in the bonafide interest of justice and fair play; And for which act of your kindness, the petitioner shall as in duty bound, ever pray.”

6. Vide Annexure-5 dated 04.04.2025 issued by Certificate Officer-cum-ADM, Bhubaneswar, the Petitioner had been granted 30 days time to file a petition denying liability on the grounds specified in the notice, relevant portion of which is extracted below:- “You are hereby informed that a certificate against you for Rs.53,10,821/-due from you on account of debt has this day been filed in my office, under section 4(1) of the Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1962. If you deny your liability to pay the said sum of Rs.53,10,821/-you may, within thirty days from the service of this notice, file in my office a petition denying liability, in whole or in part, on one or more of the grounds specified below:

(d) The certificate dues have been fully or partly paid.

(e) The person on whom such notice has been served is not the person named as certificate- debtor in the certificate.

(f) A certificate-debtor in respect of dues other than those in relation to which the liability under any law for the time being in force is not open to question in a Civil Court, may also deny his liability on any other ground. If within the said thirty days, you fail to file such petition or if you fail to show cause or do not show sufficient cause, why such certificate should not be executed, it will be executed, under the provisions of this said Act, unless you pay Rs.53,10,821/-on account of the demand and Rs…………. account of costs of realization) into my office. *[Until the said amount is so paid you are hereby prohibited from making any private transfer of delivery of any of your immovable property situated in this district or in the case of a revenue-paying estate, borne on the revenue-roll of the district, or of any interest in such property and should you make any such transaction, it shall be void against any claim enforceable in execution of this certificate]. If you, in the meantime conceal, remove or dispose of any part of your movable property, the certificate will be executed immediately.

A copy of the certificate above-mentioned is hereto annexed. You may remit the amount by money-order, quoting the number and year of the certificate.”

7. Mr. B.S. Tripathy, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the Petitioner referring to Section 2 (g), 3 and 4 of the Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act (in short “the OPDR Act”) submits that the amount due to a private party cannot be considered to be a public demand for which the OPDR Act cannot be utilized for realization of the amount of compensation which has been adjudicated by the Adjudicating Officer, Real Estate Regulatory Authority.

8. It appears from order dated 23.06.2026 that the Petitioner has appeared before the Opposite Party No.2- Cetificate Officer-cum-Additional District Magistrate, Bhubaneswar and sought for time to file his show cause.

9. Mr. Tripathy, learned Senior Advocate further submits that the case was posted to 14.07.2026, but now it had been posted to 04.08.2026. He submits that he shall file a show cause reply by the said date and direction may be issued to the Opposite Party No.2 to consider his show cause as well as puspa petition under Section 8 of the OPDR Act denying his liability and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law.

10. Considering the said submissions, the writ petition is disposed of directing the Opposite Party No.2-Cetificate Officer-cum-Additional District Magistrate, Bhubaneswar to consider the show cause of the Petitioner as well as his application under Section 8 of the OPDR Act denying liability expeditiously, but in accordance with law.

11. Since the show cause of the Petitioner is yet to be considered, steps for realization of the certificate amount shall not be taken before disposal of the show cause reply and application of the Petitioner filed under Section 8 of the OPDR Act.

12. Pending interim application (s) stand disposed of.

13. Issue urgent certified copy.

(Savitri Ratho)

Judge

Digitally Signed Signed by: PUSPANJALI MOHAPATRA Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 30-Jul-2026 18:28:57 Signature Not Verified