LINGARAJ MAHAPRABHU Vs. STATE OF ORISSA & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these writ petitions involve common questions of fact and law and therefore, they were heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgment. OJC Nos. 5594 of 1995 and 8148, 8149, 8150, 8151 of 1998 are filed by the Deity, Lord Lingaraj Mahaprabhu, Bije-Bhubaneswar. The other four writ petitions have been filed by some private individuals.

(2.) The facts of the case are as follows:-

(3.) In the writ petitions filed by the Deity the Grounds of challenge to both the impugned orders of the Member, Board of Revenue are same. Identical contentions are raised by the purchasers from Somanath Mohapatra and Nrusingha Mohapatra with regard to their claims. The purchasers from Nrusingha Mohapatra, viz. the petitioners in OJC No.9073, 13548, 13460, 13459 of 1998 and the purchaser from Somanath Mohapatra, i.e., Opposite Party No.4 in OJC No.5594 of 1995 contend that the disputed property was the trust estate of Lord Lingaraj Mahaprabhu, and that Somanath Mohapatra and Nrusingha Mohapatra made application to the Commissioner of Endowments for grant of permission for permanent lease of the disputed land for residential purpose in their favour under section 19 of the OHRE Act. Their applications were registered as O.P. Case No.74 and 76 of 1966 and by order dated 12.07.1970, the Endowment Commissioner passed order granting permission for permanent lease, where after the Temple Office of the Deity received salami from Somanath Mohapatra and Nrusingha Mohapatra and issued receipt in respect thereof and mutated the plot in question as plot Nos.247/1 and 247/2 in the names of Somanath Mohapatra and Nrusingha Mohapatra. The Executive Officer of the Deity issued ownership certificate to Somanath Mohapatra and Nrusingha Mohapatra in respect of those plots. They also paid land revenue in the office of the Lord Lingaraj Mahaprabhu and obtained receipts. It is contended that even though no lease deed was executed and registered, the lease was created by acceptance of salami and rent and issuance of ownership certificate and delivery of possession to Somanath Mohapatra and Nrusingha Mohapatra. It is stated that by a Registered Sale Deed dated 06.12.1972, Somanath Mohapatra sold his part of the disputed land in favour of Gopal Chandra Das, who entered into possession, obtained permission from the Special Planning Authority and constructed a house and has been paying holding tax. It is stated that during settlement operation parcha in respect of the property purchased by Gopal Chandra Das was issued in his favour. It is also stated that, Gopal Chandra Das also filed OEA Lease Case No.292 of 1984 before the Additional Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar which was rejected on the ground that the land had already been settled with the Deity, Lord Lingaraj Mahaprabhu in OEA Revision Case No.3 of 1981. It is stated by learned Counsel for Gopal Chandra Das (Opposite Party No.2) in OJC No.5594 of 1995, that the order dated 21.03.1993 passed by the Member, Board of Revenue in OEA Revision Case No.3 of 1981 directing to exclude the disputed property from the settlement made in favour of the Deity is quite justified.