Cuttack: Orissa high court has sought a status report from the state govt on the settlement of disputes over Record of Rights (RoR) entries of Ekharajat Mahal lands of Lord Jagannath. The court issued the direction on Sept 18 while hearing a PIL, which was filed by Jatni-based Purbatana Ekharajat Mahala Raiyat Surakhya Committee, regarding a dispute over RoR entries concerning Ekharajat Mahal lands at 36 villages in Khurda district.Ekharajat Mahal comprises historic estate lands whose revenues were traditionally used to meet the expenses of daily rituals at the Jagannath Temple in Puri. The estate covered 156 villages in present-day Khurda district. Generations of raiyats have cultivated these lands and paid land revenue.Initially, plots in these 156 villages were vested with the state govt and the tenant farmers were recognised as the legitimate holders paying revenue to the state since 1974. However, when the land settlement exercises were conducted between 2000 and 2012, rights were recorded in favour of tenants in 120 villages, the remaining 36 villages were left out. Later, the plots in those 36 villages were recorded under the name of Shree Jagannath Temple Managing Committee, affecting the property rights and transactions of generational or long-standing residents. These lands have since, over the years, remained a subject of dispute.Senior advocate Lalatendu Samantaray, who argued on behalf of the petitioners, contended that once the govt decided to correct the entries made in the RoR pertaining to the Ekharajat Mahal lands of Lord Jagannath, and admittedly completed such exercise in respect to 120 villages, there was no justification in leaving 36 villages. A division bench of Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Justice Chittaranjan Dash gave the govt two weeks to file an affidavit clarifying the status of the Special Revisional Court reportedly constituted to adjudicate RoR disputes on a camp basis. The matter will be heard next on Oct 14.The bench observed that “the counsel appearing for the state is unable to apprise the court as to whether the said Revisional Court is still functional or operational thereafter.”The Jagannath Temple administration contended that Shri Jagannath Temple Act, 1955, provides a forum for persons aggrieved by such entries. The bench questioned this stand, pointing to the reported creation of the special revisional mechanism. “If the forum was in place, there was no point in creating a Special Revisional Court by the govt,” the judges observed.