SOUBHAGYA KUMAR NAYAK Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the order dtd. 25/4/2025 passed by the Assistant Settlement Officer, Rental Colony Bhubaneswar Office at Cuttack in Misc. Case No.195 of 2024.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that one Batakrushna Das was allowed to possess a land leased out by the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar and he sold Ac.0.72 decimal to the petitioner by virtue of registered sale deed No.3961 dtd. 14/11/1994. During settlement operations, the petitioner applied to record the land in his name. The Assistant Settlement Officer recorded Ac.0.60 decimal in the name of the petitioner, despite the Amin's report confirming possession of Ac.0.72 decimal, resulting in loss of Ac.0.12 decimal. Therefore, the petitioner filed this writ petition beseeching indulgence to set aside the order dtd. 25/4/2025 passed by the Assistant Settlement Officer, Rental Colony, Bhubaneswar in Misc. Case No. 195/2024.

(3.) When the matter is taken up today, perceiving availability of alternative remedy to question the legality and validity of the said Order dtd. 25/4/2025, the learned counsel made a fair request for grant of liberty to avail the opportunity to approach the appropriate forum. Conceding the same, the Additional Government Advocate did not have any objection for the petitioner to prefer remedy provided under the statute.