p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 18028 of 2026 Hemalata Patro …. Petitioner Mr. Prasanta Kumar Nanda, Advocate -versus- 1. Odisha State Housing Board, represented through its Administrative Officer (Rural), Bhubaneswar, District- Khordha 2. Koraput Municipality, Koraput 3. Special Planning Authority, Koraput 4. Collector, Koraput 5. Tahasildar, Koraput …. Opp. Parties Mr. Dayanidhi Lenka, AGA (For Opposite Parties No.4 and 5) CORAM: HON’BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO ORDER Order No. 17.06.2026 01. (Through virtual mode) 1. This writ petition has been filed challenging the notice dated 03.06.2026 issued by Executive Officer, Koraput Municipality (in short “Municipality”) under Annexure-4 and to restrain the Opposite Parties from interfering with the possession of the Petitioner in free movement from her house. 2. Mr. Prasanta Kumar Nanda, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that Annexure-4 is the joint notice dated 03.06.2026 issued by Executive Officer, Koraput Municipality issued to the p. 2 Petitioner and three other house owners for occupying vacant Government land adjacent to their houses illegally by constructing boundary wall/ wire fencing. He submits that the land in question belongs to the Petitioner, but without conducting any demarcation and giving any opportunity to the Petitioner to show cause, the said notice of eviction has been issued granting only 24 hours to vacate the said land. He further submits that the Petitioner may be granted opportunity to file show cause reply stating as to why she should not be evicted from the said land. He also submits that the Executive Officer does not have any authority to issue the impugned notice of eviction as the land in question does not belong to the Municipality. Unless it is determined whether the land belongs to the Odisha State Housing Board (in short “OSHB”), Government or Municipality, such notice of eviction is unsustainable. He also submits that the Petitioner has not made any construction over the said land but it is merely using some portion of it for parking of vehicle. He also submits that before 03.06.2026, the Petitioner has not received any notice either from the Municipality or the OSHB or the Government for vacating the said land for which the Petitioner may be granted an opportunity to p. 3 puspa show cause. After hearing her and considering her show cause reply, order of eviction/demolition, if any, may be passed. 3. Mr. Dayanidhi Lenka, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that as the land in question, does not belong to the Petitioner, she has no authority to enclose it by a barbed wire or boundary wall. 4. Considering the above submissions, the writ petition is disposed of, permitting the Petitioner to file a reply to the impugned notice of the Executive Officer, Koraput Municipality within a period of 10 days from today. This reply shall be considered in accordance with law and disposed of by a reasoned order within a period of three weeks thereafter after granting opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner. For a period of four weeks, the impugned notice should not be acted upon, provided the Petitioner cooperates for consideration and disposal of her show cause reply. 5. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. (Savitri Ratho) Vacation Judge