IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.10450 of 2025 Triveni Automobiles, Choudwar, Cuttack …. Petitioner Represented By Adv. Ms. Sangita Mohanty -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. …. Opposite Parties Represented by AGA Mr. Debasish Nayak CORAM: DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI Order No. ORDER 21.04.2025 01. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. 2. Heard. 3. In filing this Writ Petition, the Petitioner has challenged the notice of eviction issued by the Tahasildar, Tangi Choudwar/Opposite Party No.2 vide Annexure-1. 4. During course of hearing, learned counsel for the State submits that there is a clear statutory remedy of Appeal available against the impugned notice of eviction issued by the Tahasildar, Tangi Choudwar/Opposite Party No.2 vide Annexure-1. Hence, the Petitioner should approach the concerned Appellate Authority by filing appeal. 5. Since the eviction notice has not been issued in the format of form ‘Kha’ to the Petitioner, the said notice issued by the Tahasildar, Tangi Choudwar/Opposite Party No.2 vide Annexure-1 be treated as Form ‘Kha’. 6. In such view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to entertain the prayer made in this Writ Petition. However, considering the request of learned counsel for the Petitioner, this Court permits the Petitioner to file an appeal along with a petition for condonation of delay, if any, so also a petition for interim protection before the appellate authority within a period of fifteen working days hence. In such event, the appellate authority shall conclude the hearing within a period of three months from the date of filing of the appeal. 7. It is further directed that till the interim application to be filed by the Petitioner is taken up by the Appellate Authority, no coercive action shall be taken against the Petitioner pursuant to the notice of eviction issued by the Tahasildar, Tangi Choudwar/Opposite Party No.2 vide Annexure-1. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. (Dr. S.K. Panigrahi) Judge Sumitra