Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2024 DAILYLAW 1041 (ORI)

SUBHALAXMI SAMANTARA v. RIZWANA KABAB, E.O., KHURDA MUNICIPALITY

CONTC/1862/2024 · 2026-03-13

R K Pattanaik

Writ Petition (Civil)body2024

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CONTC No.1862 of 2024 Subhalaxmi Samantara …. Petitioner Mr. R.N. Behera, Advocate -Versus- Rizwana Kabab, Executive Officer, Khurda Municipality …. Opposite Party/Contemnor Ms. P.P. Barik, Advocate on behalf of Mr. S.B. Panda, Advocate CORAM: MR. JUSTICER.K. PATTANAIK Order No. ORDER 13.03.2026 08. 1. Heard learned counsels for the respective parties. 2. Instant contempt petition is filed by the petitioner for disobedience of the order of this Court at Annexure-1 and also directions issued in W.A. No.189 of 2024 on the grounds stated. 3. Referring to Annexure-3, a copy of the affidavit, it is submitted to the Court by learned counsel for the petitioner that the order as per Annexure-2 was immediately informed to the opposite party/contemnor but it was not entertained and hence, the same has been disobeyed. The further submission that the petitioner was allowed time to vacate the case land by order in W.P.(C) No.17226 of 2023 and upheld in WA No.189 of 2024 but for the reason stated, despite an affidavit dated 23rd February, 2024 i.e. Annexure-2, it has been ignored. p. 2 4. Recorded the submission Ms. Barik, learned counsel opposite party/contemnor. 5. Perused the show cause affidavit of the opposite party/contemnor and also the reply of the petitioner. 6. According to the opposite party/contemnor, the order in WA No.189 of 2024 dated 23rd February, 2024 i.e. Annexure-2 was not within their knowledge. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that the affidavit was filed on 23rd February, 2024 itself, the date on which, the order in WA No.189 of 2024 was passed. But on perusal of the affidavit i.e. Annexure-3, there is no endorsement thereon and hence, it is not possible to accept the claim of the petitioner that the order at Annexure-2 was brought to the notice of the opposite party/contemnor. In view of the above, accepting the show cause reply of the opposite party/contemnor, the contempt proceeding hereby dropped. 7. Consequently, the CONTC stands disposed of. (R. K. Pattanaik) Judge TUDU