RAMA CHANDRA BASTIA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner being the land holder files this application to hold that the action taken subsequent to the notification under Section 10 (1) of the Act is nonest in the eye of law and seeks to quash Annexure -3, the letter dated 24.7.2002 issued by the Director, Municipal Administration and Ex -Officio, Addl. Secretary to Government of Odisha, Bhubaneswar and further seeks to hold that since the proceeding under the Urban land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 abated, vesting of the surplus urban land with the Government did not arise at all.

(2.) THE epitome of the fact in the case in hand is that the petitioner being a land holder has filed his return/statement under Section 6 of the Urban land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 in respect of class ,,B urban agglomeration. On the basis of the return/statement, draft statement was prepared under section 8 of the Act which was communicated to the petitioner by notice no. 1083 dated 1.8.1993. The petitioner had filed his objection on 12.09.1983 and also submitted a representation on 15.11.1983 seeking for exemption under section 20 of the Act. By then the final statement under section 9 of the Act had been prepared and communicated to the petitioner. The petitioner filed an appeal under section 3 of the Act. The final statement prepared under Section 9 of the Act was set aside by the appellate authority on 3.6.1986 and the matter was remanded back to the competent authority for adjudication on certain points vig. nature of the land on the crucial date of commencement of the act vis - à -vis the relevant entry in the Hal settlement Record of Rights and the report of the Revenue Supervisor.

(3.) DURING pendency of the proceeding before the competent authority, statutory appeal, the writ application as well as the SLP, the representation dated 15.11.1983 for exemption under the provisions of Section 20 of the Act remained pending and the same is lying undisposed of till date. Notice under Section 10 (1) of the Act was issued on 11.5.1984 during pendency of the said representation and steps subsequent to such notification were also taken. It is stated that when the matter was sub -judice before the apex Court, the competent authority by letter no. 1624 dated 15.7.1991 and letter no. 2331 dated 1.10.1993 was pleased to forward the comments upon the representation under Section 20 of the Act to the State Government and the matter is still pending for consideration and no response has also been communicated so far in respect of the representation dated 10.12.1991 under Annexure -1 requesting the competent authority to communicate the decision taken on the representation under Section 20 of the Act. However, a representation vide Annexure -2 dated 16.3.1994 has also been duly acknowledged by opposite party no.1 and in August, 1996 the opposite party no.2 recommended for exemption in favour of twenty -two returnees under Section 20 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 and the petitioner name has been shown at serial seventeen of the said list of returnees.