BABAJI PRADHAN @ BABAJI CHARAN PRADHAN vs STATE OF ODISHA — WP(C)/10574/2026

Case under Constitution of India, 1950 Section 226,227. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 09th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: ODHC010232832026

Filing Number

WP(C)/13789/2026

Filing Date

30-Mar-2026

Registration No

WP(C)/10574/2026

Registration Date

07-Apr-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice B. P. Routray

Coram

Mr. Justice B. P. Routray

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

LAND LAWS AND AGRICULTURAL TENANCIES ( 20 )

Sub-Category

ORISSA PREVENTION OF LAND ENCROACHMENT ACT ( 11 )

Judicial Branch

Civil Section

Decision Date

09-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Last updated 12-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India, 1950 Section 226,227

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.BABAJI PRADHAN @ BABAJI CHARAN PRADHAN

    Adv. PRASANTA KUMAR SATAPATHY,P.PANDA, S.PATI, B.DAS, A.K.BARIK,P.PANDA, S.PATI, B.DAS, A.K.BARIK, P.PANDA, S.PATI, B.DAS, A.K.BARIK

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF ODISHA

  2. 2.COLLECTOR, JAGATSINGHPUR

  3. 3.SUB-COLLECTOR, JAGATSINGHPUR

  4. 4.TAHASILDAR, BALIKUDA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 09-Apr-2026

    Mr. Justice B. P. RoutrayView PDF

    The High Court of Orissa allowed the petitioner Babaji Pradhan to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file an appeal before the appellate forum. The court granted a 30-day period to file the appeal and directed that limitation be considered liberally, with the petitioner not being evicted from the disputed land during this period or until appeal filing, whichever is earlier. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-Apr-2026

    Fresh Admission

    Mr. Justice B. P. Routray

  4. 30-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP(C)/10574/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Orissa allowed the petitioner Babaji Pradhan to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file an appeal before the appellate forum. The court granted a 30-day period to file the appeal and directed that limitation be considered liberally, with the petitioner not being evicted from the disputed land during this period or until appeal filing, whichever is earlier. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case