JUDGMENT Arindam Sinha, J. - Mr. Das, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and draws attention to paragraph 17 in the writ petition carrying statement that there was loud speaker announcement on 16th December, 2022 and immediately thereafter, demolition of his client's house on 19th December, 2022. His client was residing with electricity and water connections and has suffered at the hands of State. He submits, prayers in the writ petition are twofold. Firstly, for directing settlement of land in favour of his client to facilitate 'Pucca Ghar' as under 'Biju Pucca Ghar Yojana'. Secondly, for adequate compensation as consequence for demolishing his house in violation of principles of natural justice. 2. Mr. Sharma, learned advocate, Additional Government Advocate appears on behalf of State and submits, so far as the housing scheme is concerned, petitioner has not applied. Without prejudice he submits, petitioner is ineligible to apply under the scheme as it relates to rural housing. Therefore, petitioner's eligibility is as per Prime Minister's Housing Scheme. Petitioner's grievance regarding demolition falls under assignment entry no.4 in the list of the Hon'ble Dr. Justice, B. R. Sarangi. 3. On query from Court, Mr. Das submits, his client will make application under the applicable scheme. 4. Petitioner is at liberty to make application under the scheme applicable to him. In event, such application is made, it is expected the concerned authority will expeditiously deal with the same. 5. This Bench has not entered into the controversy regarding second prayer of petitioner on alleging illegal demolition. As such, the writ petition is disposed of on direction regarding the first prayer with liberty to petitioner to separately file for his grievance under the second prayer, if so advised.