The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) Nos.16606 & 16608 of 2024 & W.P.(C) Nos.19813 & 19814 of 2011 W.P.(C) No.16606 of 2024 Prakash Kumar Sahani …. Petitioner Mr. S.S. Bhuyan, Advocate State of Odisha & Others -versus- ….
Legal Reasoning
Opposite Parties Mr. M.K. Balabantaray, AGA CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
Decision
ORDER 13.09.2024 Order No. 03. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties. 3. Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition inter alia challenging the order dtd.28.10.2010 so passed by Opposite Party No.4 in OLR Case Nos.145, 146, 147 & 450 of 1974 vide Annexure-4. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that taking recourse to the provisions contained under Section-40-A of the Orissa Land Reforms Act, 1960 (in short the Act), Petitioner herein made the application before Opposite Party No.4 on 11.03.2010 under Annexure-3. Section-40-A of the Act reads as follows:- // 2 // “40-A. Submission of returns (1) Every person holding land (which shall include lands transferred by sale, gift or otherwise or partitioned by him after the 26th day of September, 1970) either as land-holder or raiyat in excess of the ceiling area at commencement of the Odisha Land Reforms (Amendment) Act, 1973, shall, before the expiry of ninety days from such commencement, submit to the Revenue Officer in such form and in such manner as may be prescribed, a return indicating the parcels of land which he wishes to retain and the parcels of land in excess of the ceiling area (hereinafter referred to as "surplus land") and furnish in the said returns such other particulars as may be prescribed : Provided that a person who has made any transfer or effected any partition in contravention of the provisions of Sub-section (1) of Section 40, shall not have the right to indicate the parcels of land which he wishes to retain and the parcels of land in excess of the ceiling area, but shall have to file the return furnishing the particulars of all the lands held by him as aforesaid. Provided further that whereas a consequence of the amendment of this Act by the Odisha Land Reforms (Amendment). Ordinance 1974. (2 of 1974) such person considers it necessary to submit a return or revised return, such return or revised return shall be submitted within thirty days from the date of publication of the said Ordinance in the Gazette. (2) In any case where on the date of submission of the return under Sub-section (1) - (a) any proceeding for resumption under Chapter III or mutation proceeding or proceedings for partition in a Civil Court "[instituted prior to the 26th day of September, 1970] in respect of any land forming subject-matter of the return; or (b) any proceeding under Section 57-A relating to trust on whose behalf the return has been submitted, is pending the person who has submitted such return shall submit a revised return on the basis of the result of such proceeding in accordance with Sub-section (1) within [thirty days] from the date of issue of the certificate under Section 29 or, as the case may be, from the date of final disposal of the for partition or mutation proceedings, proceedings Page 2 of 5 // 3 // proceedings under Section 57-A after the termination of appeal, revision or review, if any [or from the date of commencement of the Odisha Land Reforms (Second Amendment) Act, 1975, whichever is later]. 4.1. It is contended that Petitioner being the recorded land owner, was eligible and entitled to make the return as provided under Section-40-A of the Act. But only on the ground of limitation, the same was not considered and rejected vide the impugned order dtd.28.10.2010 under Annexure-4. 4.2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that in view of the provisions contained under Rule-36 of the Orissa Land Reforms (General Rules), 1965 the application filed under Section-40-A should have been entertained. Rule-36 of the Rules reads as follows:- “36. Manner of disposal of objections under Sub-section (1) of Section 48- (1) When an objection to the draft [***] Assessment Roll is received, notice of the objection shall be served on every person whose interest may in the opinion of the Revenue Officer be affected thereby and all such persons shall be called upon to attend at such time and place as the Revenue Officer may fix for disposal of the objection. (2) On the date fixed for hearing of the objection or on any other date to which the hearing may stand adjourned, the Revenue Officer which king such enquiry as he considers necessary and after shelling the parties present an opportunity of being heard pass such orders as he deems proper”. 4.3. It is accordingly contended that even though the application under Section-40-A was filed beyond the Page 3 of 5 // 4 // prescribed period of limitation, but in view of the provisions contained under Rule-36 of the Rules, the same could not have been rejected on the ground of limitation. It is accordingly contended that the impugned order is not sustainable in the eye of law. 5. Even though no counter affidavit has been filed by the State but basing on the materials available on record, learned Addl. Government Advocate contended that as provided under Section-40-A of the Act an application has to be made prior to expiry of 90 days from such commencement of the Orissa Land Reforms Amendment Act, 1973. Since the present application under Section- 40-A of the Act admittedly has not been filed within the prescribed period of 90 days from commencement of the Orissa Land Reforms Amendment Act, 1973, which was notified on 13.04.1974 the Revenue Officer-Opposite Party No.4 on the ground of limitation rejected the same vide the impugned order. It is also contended that Rule- 36 of the Rules has got no applicability with regard to consideration of application filed under Section-40-A of the Act. It is accordingly contended that no illegality or irregularity can be found with regard to rejection of the Petitioner’s claim vide the impugned order under Annexure-4. 6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made, this Court Page 4 of 5 // 5 // finds that Petitioner herein moved an application purportedly filed under Section-40-A of the Act on 11.03.2010 under Annexure-3. As provided under the said provision, an application is to be filed prior to expiry of 90 days from the commencement of the Orissa Land Reforms Amendment Act, 1973, which was notified on 13.04.1974. 6.1. It is found that the application in question has not been filed within the prescribed period of limitation as provided under Section-40-A of the Act and has been filed with inordinate delay. Not only that it is the view of this Court that Rule-36 of the Rules has got no applicability with regard to consideration of an application filed under Section-40-A of the Act. 6.2. In view of the aforesaid analysis this Court finds no illegality or irregularity with the impugned order dtd.28.10.2010, so passed by Opposite Party No.4 under Annexure-4 and accordingly not inclined to interfere with the same. 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. 8. Photocopy of the order be placed in other connected cases. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBRAT KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Subrat Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 20-Sep-2024 15:32:07 (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Page 5 of 5