Disposed

Gouri Sarkar v. Collector, Kendrapada

Orissa HC7 Apr 2021WP(C)/6338/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Orissa recalled a previous order via an interim application and disposed of a writ petition against the Tahasildar's inaction on a mutation petition. The Court directed the Tahasildar to accept the petition if the petitioner files a specific application under Survey Rules within three weeks.

What did the court decide?

The Tahasildar is directed to accept the mutation petition and proceed with the matter if the petitioner files an application under Rule 34 of the Orissa Survey and Settlement Rules, 1962 within three

Gouri Sarkar Vs Collector, Kendrapada — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) NO. 6338 OF 2021

¶2

Gouri Sarkar

¶3

…. Petitioner

¶4

Mrs. Sujata Jena, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

…. Collector, Kendrapada and another Opp. Parties Mr. Dillip Kumar Mishra, Additional Government Advocate

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

07.03.2022

I.A. No. 297 of 2022

¶13

¶14

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. This is an application for modification of the order dated 7^th April, 2021 by which the writ petition was disposed of. 3. Taking into consideration the averments made in this petition and the submission made by learned counsel for the Petitioner, the order dated 7^th April, 2021 is recalled.

¶15

The I.A. is accordingly disposed of.

¶16

(K.R. Mohapatra) Judge

¶17

W.P.(C) NO. 6338 OF 2021

¶18

¶19

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶20

At the outset, Mrs. Jena, learned counsel for the Petitioner makes an oral prayer for correction of description of the Opposite Party No.2 in the cause title of the writ petition.

¶21

Page 1 of 3

¶22

// 2 //

¶23

Prayer is allowed. Mrs. Jena, learned counsel for the Petitioner is permitted to make necessary correction in the cause title of the writ petition in Court today.

¶24

Though this matter was listed for orders, on consent of learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for admission and final disposal.

¶25

The grievance of the Petitioner in this writ petition is with regard to inaction of the Tahasildar, Mahakalpada in accepting the mutation petition intended to be filed by the Petitioner.

¶26

Mrs. Jena, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner claims title over the suit land on the basis of the judgment dated 22^nd July, 2002 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Kendrapada in T.A. No.23 of 1993. It is her submission that the said judgment and decree is still in vogue and has not been set aside or varied by any competent court of law. In spite of the same, the Tahasildar, Mahakalpada is not accepting the mutation petition to mutate the land in the name of the Petitioner.

¶27

Taking into consideration the submission made by Mrs. Jena, learned counsel for the Petitioner, this Court vide order dated 5^th March, 2021 directed learned State Counsel to take instruction in the matter.

¶28

Today, Mr. Mishra, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State submits that he has not received any instruction and prays for some more time for the same.

¶29

Page 2 of 3

¶30

// 3 //

¶31

Taking into consideration the nature of dispute involved in this writ petition, this Court feels that interest of justice will be best served, if the Tahasildar, Mahakalpada accepts the mutation petition and proceeds with the matter in accordance with law.

¶32

This Court, accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case disposes of this writ petition with a direction that in the event the Petitioner files an application under Rule 34 of the Orissa Survey and Settlement Rules, 1962 complete in all respect along with certified copy of this order within a period of three weeks hence, the Tahasildar, Mahakalpada-Opposite Party No.2 shall do well to accept the same and proceed with the matter

¶33

in accordance with law.

¶34

bks

¶35

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper
application.
(K.R. Mohapatra)
Judge

¶36

Page 3 of 3

Gouri Sarkar v. Collector, Kendrapada

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gouri Sarkar v. Collector, Kendrapada

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hemalata Vs Pachei

Radhamohan Nayak Vs State of Odisha

Duryodhan Patra Vs State of Odisha

Satya Narayan Mohapatra Vs Prasanna Kumar Mohapatra

Dayanidhi Nayak Vs Dhobi Naik

Rashmita Nayak Vs Susanta Kumar Ray