IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P(C) No. 4751 of 2026 Pramod Kumar Satpathy …. Petitioner Mr. B.P. Mohanty, Advocate -versus- Tahasildar, Satyabadi, Puri & Another …. Opp. Parties Mr. U.C. Behura, AGA CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH Order No. ORDER 20.03.2026 01. 1. By means of this application, the Petitioner seeks the following relief:- “In view of the facts and circumstances as detailed above it is therefore humbly prayed that, your Lordships may graciously be pleased to (a) Issue a writ of mandamus directing OP No.l, Tahsildar, Satyabadi to dispose of the grievance (Annexure 6) filed by the petitioner and forthwith demarcate specifically the plots of OP No.2 (TPCODL, Sakhigopal) separately in presence of both parties. (b) Restrain OP No.2 and its staffs from interfering in any manner with the petitioner's peaceful possession over the suit land. c) Pass such other order/orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.;” p. 2 2. It is submitted by Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel for the Petitioner, that pursuant to the order passed by the District Judge, Puri, in L.A. Misc. Case No.22 of 2022, the learned Competent Authority-cum-Land Acquisition Officer, N.H. Authority, directed to pay compensation to the Petitioner in respect of the acquisition of land, being the owner of Plot No.2135 under Khata No.854, in Mouza Kanjia, Tahasil Satyabadi, District Puri, measuring an area of Ac.0.020 Dec. The said order of the competent authority, in consequence, recognizes the ownership of the Petitioner over the subject land of the Petitioner, thereby entitling him to the compensation. Learned counsel, Mr. Mohanty further drew the attention of this Court to the order passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No.18277 of 2021, wherein the Co-ordinate Bench without getting into the merits of the case has directed the Tahasildar, Satyabadi to look into the grievance of the Petitioner and to do the needful within a period of two months. 3. Be that as it may, having regard to the prayer made by the Petitioner in respect to the demarcation of the land pertaining to the plot, the ownership whereof goes to the Opp. Party No.2, i.e. the SDO, TPCODL, Sakhigopal cannot be accepted. Needless to mention that the p. 3 Petitioner being the owner in respect to the Plot No.2135 under Khata No.854, in Mauja- Kanjia, Tahasil Satyabadi, District-Puri, has every right to seek demarcation of his own land, but the present prayer being one relates to demarcation of the land of another party, in absence of any dispute or observation as to the overlapping of the land in question in respect to that of Opp. Party No.2, cannot be entertained. 4. The Petitioner is, however, in liberty to move before the learned Tahasildar for demarcation of his land in accordance with law. In the event any such application is moved before the authority, the same shall be disposed of within a period of three months, in accordance with law, with notice to the Parties concerned. 5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. (Chittaranjan Dash) Judge Sarbani Designation: Junior Stenographer