p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.265 of 2024 Nalini Panda …. Petitioner(s) Mr. Banshidhar Baug, Sr. Adv. & Associates -versus- Odisha State Housing Board, Bhubaneswar & Ors. …. Opposite Party(s) Mr. D.K. Pradhan, Adv. (for O.P. Nos.1 to 3) CORAM: HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI Order No. 14. ORDER 10.03.2026 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. 2. The Petitioner, Nalini Panda, has filed the present Writ Petition with a prayer for a direction to the Opposite Parties to allot the excess land measuring 750 sq. ft. situated to the East of the Petitioner’ land, on payment of benchmark valuation. 3. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the available materials on record. 4. Mr. Banshidhar Baug, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the Petitioner, submits that the house of the Petitioner i.e. HIG-19, Bhubaneswar, was initially allotted in favour of Sri Prabhat Chandra Panda Digitally Signed Signed by: SIPUN BEHERA Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 12-Mar-2026 12:56:17 Signature Not Verified p. 2 and subsequently transferred to the present Petitioner. The total area of the plot is 2700 sq. ft., out of which the plinth area is 1429 sq. ft. Possession of the said property was handed over to the original allottee vide OSHB Memo No.8351 dated 23.09.21995 and the lease deed was executed on 25.05.2005. 5. Learned Senior Advocate further contends that the Board Members of the Housing Board, in their meeting held on 07.08.2023, took a policy-decision to the effect that allottees of OSHB adjacent plots may claim the extra surplus/encroached land adjoining their plots. The Petitioner is ready and willing to pay the bench mark valuation for the said excess land. Accordingly, the Petitioner claims allotment of the said additional area measuring 750 sq. ft. 6. Learned counsel for the Opposite Party Nos.1 to 3 submits that there is no policy-decision has been formally notified with respect to the allotment of such land to adjacent allottees. It is further submitted that a resolution cannot be treated as a notification unless it is formally notified. The minutes of the meeting, by themselves, have no legal sanctity and merely record the discussions held in the meeting. Hence, the prayer made in the present Petition cannot be acceded to. Page 3 of 3 7. After hearing learned counsel for the respective parties, this Court is of the view that the Petitioner may approach the Orissa State Housing Board by filing an appropriate representation seeking allotment of the extra land adjoining the plot measuring 750 sq. ft. This Court does not express any opinion on the merits of the case. If the Housing Board has any policy-decision regarding allotment of such land in favour of the adjacent allottees, the Housing Board may consider the Petitioner’s case in accordance with such policy. The Housing Board is also directed to take a decision in the matter within a period of three weeks from today. 8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. 9. Till such decision is taken by the Orissa State Housing Board, no coercive action shall be taken with respect to the extra land adjoining the Petitioner’s plot measuring 750 sq. ft. 10. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of. 11. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. (Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi) Judge Sipun