Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2026 DAILYLAW 15533 (ORI)

BIMAL KISHORE MOHAPATRA v. STATE OF ODISHA

WP(C)/14052/2026 · 2026-05-20

S K Panigrahi

Writ Petition (Civil)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 14052 of 2026 Bimal Kishore Mohapatra ..…... Petitioner (s) Mr. Abhijet Patnaik, Adv. -Versus- State of Odisha & Ors. ……. Opposite Party (s) Ms. Sarita Moharana, ASC Mr. Debasish Nayak, Adv. (for CMC) CORAM: DR. JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI ORDER 20.05.2026 Order No. 02. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. 2. The present Writ Petition has been filed by the Petitioner with the following prayer: “Therefore, the petitioner most humbly prays that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to: i. Issue a writ of Mandamus directing the Opposite Parties to conduct an immediate inspection of the construction of S.L.Tower at Plot No. 916, Rajabagicha, Cuttack. ii. Direct the authorities to verify the sanctioned building plan, approvals and statutory compliances relating to the said construction. iii. Direct the authorities to take appropriate action in accordance with law until then no further construction shall be continued, iv. Direct the authorities to ensure compliance with mandatory setback, drainage and safety norms applicable for multi-storied buildings. Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 21-May-2026 18:04:44 Signature Not Verified 2 Pass any other order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.” 3. Heard. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is a permanent resident of Rajabagicha, Cuttack, and his residential house is situated immediately adjacent to the ongoing construction site where a multi-stored building is being constructed. He further submits that the construction is being carried out in a grossly unsafe and illegal manner, posing a serious threat to life, property, and the safety of the surrounding residential area. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contends that the builder has constructed the structure without leaving the required side setbacks or open spaces, and the building is almost touching the boundary of the Petitioner’s residential house. This construction is extremely dangerous and violates the building regulations and safety standards. In this regard, the Petitioner has filed a representation before the Vice Chairman, Cuttack Development Authority. The said representation is still pending. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Cuttack Municipal Corporation submits that the Deputy Commissioner (U/C Court), Cuttack Municipal Corporation, has already been issued notice under Section 91(1) of the ODA Act, 1982 has been registered for Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 21-May-2026 18:04:44 Signature Not Verified 3 violation of provisions under Section 15 of the said Act against the builder. 7. In such view of the matter, this Court is of the view that since the steps have already been taken by the Cuttack Municipal Corporation/Opposite Party No.3, the filing of the present Writ Petition is now redundant. Accordingly, this Court refrains from passing any order against any parties. However, it is made clear that the Cuttack Municipal Corporation may invite the objection from the present Petitioner, if they so desire. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. ( Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi) Judge Murmu