Disposed

Saluka Sundhi v. Collector, Mayurbhanj

Orissa HC9 May 2022WP(C)/9969/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought a writ direction for the Tahasildar to issue a corrected Record of Rights (R.O.R.) based on a mutation order passed under a Will. The Court directed the Tahasildar to issue the corrected R.O.R. expeditiously, preferably within one month of receiving a certified copy of this order.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Tahasildar, Thakurmunda-Opposite Party No.3, to issue corrected R.O.R. in favour of the Petitioner within one month.

Saluka Sundhi Vs Collector, Mayurbhanj — Land Acquisition | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No. 9969 OF 2022 Saluka Sundhi Petitioner

¶3

Mr. Sarada Prasad Dash, Advocate

¶4

-versus-

¶5

…. Opp. Parties

¶6

Collector, Mayurbhanj and others

¶7

Mr. Swayambhu Mishra, Additional Standing Counsel

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

09.05.2022

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶15

This writ petition has been filed for a direction to the Tahasildar, Thakurmunda-Opposite Party No.3 to issue R.O.R. in favour of the Petitioner pursuant to the order dated 26^th April, 2021 passed in Mutation Case No.25 of 2021.

¶16

Mr. Dash, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that Mutation Case No.25 of 2021 was filed on the basis of a Will executed in favour of the Petitioner. Since probate of the Will is not required in the district of Mayurbhanj, the Tahasildar, Thakurmunda-Opposite Party No.3 following due procedure of law has directed to correct the R.O.R. in the name of the Petitioner. But, the R.O.R. has not yet been issued in favour of the Petitioner in respect of land more fully described under Annexure1 itself.

¶17

Mr. Mishra, learned Additional Standing Counsel, on instruction submits that since the order under Annexure-1 has

¶18

been passed basing upon a Will executed in favour of the Petitioner, the Tahasildar, Thakurmunda-Opposite Party No.3

¶19

Page 1 of 2

¶20

// 2 //

¶21

requires one month time to verify the records and prepare the R.O.R.

¶22

Taking into consideration the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court directs the Tahasildar, Thakurmunda-Opposite Party No.3 to issue corrected R.O.R. in respect of the land more fully described under Annexure-1 in favour of the Petitioner as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of one month from the date of production of certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.

¶23

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper

¶24

¶25

application.
(K.R. Mohapatra)
Judge

¶26

Page 2 of 2

Saluka Sundhi v. Collector, Mayurbhanj

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saluka Sundhi v. Collector, Mayurbhanj

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

Siba Sankar Dash Vs Swagatika Sarangi

Bharat B.Parida Vs I.G.of Police,Crpf

Bijay Ku.Tripathy Vs Santilata Mishra

Damodar Behera Vs Sudhakar Behera

Soubhagya Sahoo Vs Padmavati Sahoo

Sankarshan Rath Vs State of Odisha