RAMA CHANDRA MOHAPATRA Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is the Ex-Chairman of Notified Area Council (NAC), Pipili and also a local inhabitant, has filed this writ petition to quash the order dtd. 31/5/2021 passed by opposite party no.4- Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Puri in Annexure-5, by which the Executive Officer, Pipili NAC was instructed not to execute the projects sanctioned earlier in favour of him and to refund Rs.237.50 lakh to the Project Director, District Rural Development Agency (DRDA), Puri for re- release of funds to B.D.O., Pipili for execution of the projects. He further seeks to quash Annexure-10 series, the work orders dtd. 2/7/2021 issued by opposite party no.8-Block Development Officer, Pipili for execution of various projects. He also seeks direction to opposite party no.4 to pass an order to execute the works under the list of Annexure-5 through line department, i.e. Housing and Urban Development Department by e- tendering process as per the Special Problem Funds (SPF) guidelines under Annexure-2. The further prayer of the petitioner is to direct opposite party nos. 4 and 5 to execute the 94 numbers of projects through tender process basing on the letters of the learned Advocate General and opposite party no.1, based on the judgment of this Court vide Annexure-9 series.

(2.) The background facts leading to filing of the present writ petition, succinctly put, are as follows:-

(3.) Mr. Basudev Pujari, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that since projects had been sanctioned under the SPF scheme of Housing and Urban Development Department, the Collector, Puri is not the competent authority to pass an order in Annexure-5 dtd. 31/5/2021. Rather as per the conditions stipulated under the Scheme of SPF, it is the NAC, who is the competent authority to pass an order. As the NAC has been superseded and the Sub-Collector has remained in its charge as Administrator, as such he is the competent authority. Thereby, the Collector, Puri has no jurisdiction to issue such an order dtd. 31/5/2021 to stop the projects sanctioned under the scheme of SPF 2020-21. It is further contended that since the projects, which were sanctioned, come under the jurisdiction of the NAC, Pipili, which is an urban area, it should be routed through the Line Department, namely, Housing and Urban Development Department by following due procedure of law, and for transparency, it should be through a process of tender. The same having not been done, the order impugned cannot be sustained in the eye of law. It is further contended that the stand taken by the State authorities in their counter affidavit that it should be done by the Panchayat Samiti or Gram Panchayat, cannot also be sustained, as the projects come under the jurisdiction of the NAC Pipili. Thereby, reliance placed on the resolution dtd. 13/7/2018 of the PR and DW Department for execution of developmental works of Panchayat Samiti or Gram Panchayat, has no application to the present context. Hence, he seeks for quashing of the office order dtd. 31/5/2021 under Annexure-5 and also the consequential work orders dtd. 2/7/2021 issued under Annexure-10 series.