p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.108 of 2026 Tanuja Kumar Jena …. Petitioner Mr. A.K. Mohapatra, Advocate -versus- 1. State of Odisha represented through Chief Secretary, Govt. of Odisha 2. The collector, Kendrapara 3. The Sub-collector, Kendrapara 4. The Block development Officer, Marsgaghai 5. The Tahsildar, Marsgaghai …. Opposite Parties Mr. S.K. Swain, AGA CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH Order No. ORDER 27.01.2026 02. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned counsel for the State. 2. Petitioner is seeking a direction to the opposite party No- 3 i.e. the collector, Kendrapara to consider his grievance sympathetically and allot a shop in the newly constructed Marshaghi Bus stand. p. 2 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel that the Petitioner’s father had a cycle repair shop near Marshaghai Bus stand and he was continuing his business since 1975. In the year 2022, the District Administration took a decision to construct the Marshaghai Bus stand and vide Annexure-1 dated 03.09.2022, an eviction notice was issued to him. 4. It is stated that the Petitioner in terms of the said eviction notice, vacated the plot and was assured of accommodation preferably in the market complex constructed at the Marshaghai Bus stand. 5. It is further stated that the Tahasildar, Marshghai in his letter dated 16.12.2024 at Annexure-3 has referred the grievance of the Petitioner to the Block Development Officer, Marshaghai. Referring to the same, it is stated by the learned counsel that since no action has been taken, the Petitioner is before this Court. It is also urged that the non-consideration of the Petitioner’s grievance violates Article-21 of the Constitution of India. 6. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, submits that the writ petition is not maintainable and refers to the communication dated 19.11.2025 at Annexure-6, which, inter alia, indicates that all the nine shops in the shopping complex have been allotted on p. 3 the basis of auction. Hence, there is no room for allotment of a shop in favour of the Petitioner. 7. Being aggrieved by the same, the Petitioner had made a further representation dated 27.11.2025 vide Annexure-7 before the Collector, which is stated to be pending. 8. Taking into account the notice at Annexure-1 and reference of the Petitioner’s representation in the letter of Tahasildar at Annexure-3, the writ petition stands disposed of giving liberty to the Petitioner to file a fresh representation for allotment of a space to run his cycle shop in and around the Bus stand. If such representation is filed along with a copy of this order within two weeks hence, the same shall be disposed of within a period of six weeks from the date of such submission and the result thereof shall be communicated to the Petitioner. 9. It is needless to state that this Court has not expressed any opinion regarding veracity of the claim of the Petitioner. 10. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. (V. NARASINGH) Judge Soumya Designation: Jr. Stenographer