SC has stayed Odisha HC ruling in encroachment case, claims Asirbad

Sambad English Bureau Published On : Dec 11, 2014 at 4:29 PM Updated On : Dec 11, 2014 at 4:37 PM

Odisha Sun Times Bureau
Bhubaneswar, Dec 11:

The Supreme Court has ordered a stay on the Odisha High Court’s directive asking the Cuttack district administration to take possession of the government land allegedly encroached by Odisha Olympic Association (OOA), OOA secretary Asirbad Behera claimed today.

Miscreants resort to blank firing near councilor’s house at Odisha’s Khallikote

No respite from intense heatwave in Odisha as mercury crosses 42 Degree C at 20 places

On November 29, the Odisha High Court had asked the state government to take possession of about 800 decimals of encroached government land adjoining Barabati Stadium. The property on the land includes a marriage mandap and over a dozen business establishments.

The court had also asked the Crime Branch police to investigate the incident.

The OOA had approached the High Court in a miscellaneous petition seeking a stay on immediate operation of its November 29 order. But the High Court had rejected the petition filed by the OOA seeking a stay on the operation of its order.

A single judge bench of Justice B P Ray declined to grant the stay after hearing the counsels for OOA and the state government.

The state government had objected to the petition of OOA, saying the Cuttack district administration had already taken possession of the encroached land and the properties on it on November 30.

The government had then informed the High Court that the crime branch police had already started investigation.

The OOA, which had got 20 acres of government land on lease for construction of Barabati Stadium way back in 1949, subsequently encroached upon two acres of adjacent vacant government land in mid-70s.

In 1986, the OOA sub-leased the encroached land and developed various business establishments on it and earned revenue.

The state government had filed an eviction case and had challenged the encroachment in 2000. But OOA contested it in a civil court and in 2002 and had obtained a favourable decree. The state government had then moved the High Court against the judgment of the lower court.

The OOA had challenged the High Court’s eviction order in the Supreme Court and had sought a stay.