IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.14915 of 2025 Santosh Panigrahi …. Petitioner Mr. S.K. Dash, Advocate -Versus- Collector, Rayagada and others …. Opposite Parties Mr. P.K. Ray, AGA Mr. A.P. Das, Advocate (For OSRTC) CORAM: MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK Order No. ORDER 10.11.2025 03. 1. Heard Mr. Dash, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Ray, learned AGA for the State. 2. Instant writ petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the impugned notification dated 13th May, 2025 of opposite party No.2 vide Annexure-9 on the grounds stated. 3. Mr. Dash, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and others had vacated the premises with an understanding that the shop rooms would be allotted to them after construction of the market complex, which has not taken place, till date. It is further submitted that the auction is to be held in respect of the allotments subsequent to the impugned notification i.e. Annexure-9 but cancelled in the meantime and while claiming so, a notice of the Panchayat Samiti, Muniguda dated 30th May, 2025 is produced for the Court’s perusal. The further submission is that the petitioner’s grievance as per the representation dated 2nd August, 2024 at Annexure-8 is pending consideration of opposite party No.2, hence, necessary direction may perhaps be issued in that regard. 4. Mr. Das, learned counsel for opposite party No.3 appears through virtual mode. 5. Since, in the meantime, auction was to be held towards distribution of shops and café in the newly constructed bus stand at Muniguda but cancelled in view of the notice dated 30th May, 2025 as against the notification i.e. Annexure-9, recording the submissions of learned counsels for the petitioner and OSRTC besides Mr. Ray, learned AGA for the State, this Court is inclined to direct disposal of the representation dated 2nd August, 2024 addressed to opposite party No.2 followed by a decision in accordance with law and on merit taking into account Annexures-6 & 7, which are the recommendations of opposite party Nos.4 & 3 respectively. 6. Accordingly, it is ordered. 7. In the result, the writ petition stands disposed of with the direction as aforesaid to be complied with by opposite party No.2 with a further direction to consider any such allotment in favour of the petitioner inside the premises of the newly constructed market complex, as soon as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, if there is no embargo or other legal impediment. 8. Issue urgent certified copy as per rules. (R.K. Pattanaik) Judge Alok