p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.29073 of 2024 and Batch of cases (In W.P.(C) No.29073 of 2024) Sibananda Mohapatra …. Petitioner Represented By Adv. Mr. Deepak Ranjan Sundaray (In W.P.(C) Nos.29073 & 29075 of 2024) Smt. Susama Rani Sahoo, Adv. (In W.P.(C) Nos.29966, 29968, 29971, 29983, 29991, 29993, 29995, 30000, 30023, 30127, 30128, 30177, 30180, 30181, 30519, 30525, 30545, 30590, 30638, 30723, 31255 of 2024 & W.P.(C) No.1429 of 2025) -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. …. Opposite Parties Represented By AGA Mr. Bibekananda Nayak Mr. Samarendra Beura, Adv. CORAM: DR. JUSTICE SANJEEB K. PANIGRAHI Order No. ORDER 01.09.2025 W.P.(C) No.29073 of 2024 With W.P.(C) Nos.29075, 29966, 29968, 29971, 29983, 29991, 29993, 29995, 30000, 30023, 30127, 30128, 30177, 30180, 30181, 30519, 30525, 30545, 30590, 30638, 30723, 31255 of 2024 & W.P.(C) No.1429 of 2025 05. 1. All these matters are taken up through hybrid arrangement. p. 2 p. 2 2. Since common question of facts and law are involved in both the above-mentioned Writ Petitions, the same are heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 3. Heard learned counsel for the Parties. 4. The Petitioners have filed the aforesaid Writ Petitions challenging the eviction notice dated 20.09.2024 issued by the Tahasildar, Chilika with respect to the suit schedule properties in question. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that when the Petitioners are residing in their own lands and there is absolutely no encroachment over the lands in question. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that there are some encroachments by some of the Petitioners which can only be verified by conducting a joint verification and demarcation in presence of the Petitioners and the Revenue Officers. 7. Considering the facts and submissions made and in view of the proposal given by the learned counsel for the State, this Court directs the Tahasildar, Chilika to conduct a joint demarcation exercise in presence of all the Petitioners in accordance with law. The Petitioners shall be present at the time of demarcation. If it is found that the Petitioners have encroached any Government land, p. 3 p. 3 the concerned authority is free to take coercive measure to reclaim the encroached land. On the other hand, after demarcation, if it is found that the Petitioners have not encroached any land at all, the concerned authority shall allow them to reside over the lands in question peacefully without any further disturbance. The Petitioners also undertake that they shall not create any law and order problem at the demarcation spot. 8. Since the N.H.A.I. is not a necessary party, the presence of the N.H.A.I. is dispensed with. 9. As an interim measure, it is directed that till conclusion of the demarcation exercise, no coercive action shall be taken against the present Petitioners. 10. Accordingly, all the Writ Petitions are disposed of. (Dr. Sanjeeb K. Panigrahi) Judge Sumitra