SONU SUNA vs STATE OF ODISHA — WP(C)/9877/2026

Case under Constitution of India, 1950 Section 226,227. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 31st March 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: ODHC010230902026

Filing Number

WP(C)/13655/2026

Filing Date

26-Mar-2026

Registration No

WP(C)/9877/2026

Registration Date

30-Mar-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice V. Narasingh

Coram

Mr. Justice V. Narasingh

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

EVICTION UNDER THE PUBLIC PREMISES (EVICTION) ACT ( 12 )

Judicial Branch

Civil Section

Decision Date

31-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Last updated 26-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India, 1950 Section 226,227

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SONU SUNA

    Adv. PRASANTA KUMAR SATAPATHY,A.K.RAUT, P.PANDA, A.K.BARIK,A.K.RAUT, P.PANDA, A.K.BARIK, A.K.RAUT, P.PANDA, A.K.BARIK

  2. 2.MADHU SUDAN DEEP

  3. 3.MAHENDRA TAKHUR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF ODISHA

  2. 2.COLLECTOR, JHARSUGUDA

  3. 3.JHARSUGUDA MUNICIPALITY

  4. 4.EXECUTIVE OFFICER, JHARSUGUDA MUNICIPALITY

  5. 5.IIC, TOWN P.S, JHARSUGUDA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 31-Mar-2026

    Mr. Justice V. NarasinghView PDF

    The High Court of Orissa disposed of the writ petition challenging an eviction notice issued by Jharsuguda Municipality, finding that the petitioners failed to exhaust the mandatory pre-condition of approaching the municipality first. The court gave the petitioners two weeks to file a representation with the Executive Officer, who must decide within a reasonable time, during which no eviction action can proceed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 31-Mar-2026

    Fresh Admission

    Mr. Justice V. Narasingh

  4. 26-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP(C)/9877/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Orissa disposed of the writ petition challenging an eviction notice issued by Jharsuguda Municipality, finding that the petitioners failed to exhaust the mandatory pre-condition of approaching the municipality first. The court gave the petitioners two weeks to file a representation with the Executive Officer, who must decide within a reasonable time, during which no eviction action can proceed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case