Disposed¶20

Bandani Patnaik v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC4 Sept 2025WP(C)/16604/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

RoR correction; Record of Rights; Column No.2; Odisha land records; Director of Estates; Department of General Administration and Public Grievance; partition suit withdrawn; writ petition disposed with liberty to file fresh application; three-month disposal timeline; first application no bar to second; Orissa High Court at Cuttack; W.P.(C) No.16604 of 2025; Justice Ananda Chandra Behera; dated 04.09.2025.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of finally with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh application for correction of Column No.2 of the RoR annexing the order of withdrawal of the civil suit and the certified copy of this order; OP No.2 directed to entertain and dispose of such application as per law preferably within three months; the first application not to be a bar to a second application on the basis of this order.

Bandani Patnaik Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the Director of Estates and Ex-Officio, Additional Secretary, Department of General Administration and Public Grievance, Bhubaneswar (OP No.2) should be directed to correct Column No.2 of the RoR published on 22.10.1992, having refused correction on the ground that a civil suit between the petitioner and his co-sharers over the case land is sub judice/pending.

¶13

Court's answer

Taking note of learned counsel's submission regarding withdrawal of the suit for partition, the Court found it proper to dispose of the writ petition finally, granting the petitioner liberty to file a fresh application for correction of Column No.2 of the RoR of the case land, annexing the copy of the order of withdrawal of the civil suit and the certified copy of this order.

¶18

Ratio / Principle

Upon filing of such fresh application, the Director of Estates (OP No.2) shall entertain it and dispose of the same as per law, preferably within a period of three months from the date of filing of the application along with the certified copy of this order.

¶19

Key takeaways

It was made clear that the first application shall not be a bar for entertaining a second application on the basis of this order.ratio¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Orissa High Court (A.C. Behera, J.), W.P.(C) No.16604 of 2025, decided 04.09.2025 - Writ petition praying for a direction to the Director of Estates and Ex-Officio, Additional Secretary, Department of General Administration and Public Grievance, Bhubaneswar (OP No.2) to correct Column No.2 of the RoR published on 22.10.1992; correction had been refused on the ground that a civil suit between the petitioner and his co-sharers over the case land was sub judice/pending. During hearing, counsel submitted that the partition suit stands withdrawn. The Court disposed of the writ petition finally, granting liberty to file a fresh application for correction of Column No.2 of the RoR annexing the withdrawal order and the certified copy of the order, and directed OP No.2 to entertain and dispose of such application as per law preferably within three months, clarifying that the first application shall not bar a second application on the basis of the order.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.16604 of 2025

¶3

Bandani Patnaik

¶4

.....

¶5

Petitioner(s) Mr. S. Dash, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

State of Odisha and others

¶8

Opposite Parties Mr. G. Mohanty, S.C.

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA

¶11

ORDER Order No. 04.09.2025

¶12

1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).

¶13

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for directing the Director of Estates and Ex-Officio, Additional Secretary, Department of General Administration and Public Grievance, Bhubaneswar (Opposite Party No.2) to correct the Column No.2 of the RoR, which was published on 22.10.1992, because, the Opposite Party No.2 has refused to correct the Column No.2 in the RoR on the ground that, a civil suit between the petitioner and his co-sharers involving the case land is subjudice/pending.

¶14

Heard from the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State.

¶15

During the course of hearing of the writ petition, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, in the meantime, the petitioner along with his co-sharers have already withdrawn the suit, which was filed for partition of the case land, for which, there will not be any impediment under law for correcting in Column No.2 of the

¶16

Page 1 of 2

¶17

RoR of the case land by the Opposite Party No.2.

¶18

Taking the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner regarding withdrawal of the suit for partition, it is felt proper to dispose of the writ petition finally giving liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh application annexing the copy of the order concerning withdrawal of the civil suit and the certified copy of this order for correction of Column- No.2 in the RoR of the case land as per law.

¶19

In case of filing of such application, the Director of Estates and Ex-Officio, Additional Secretary, Department of General Administration and Public Grievance, Bhubaneswar (Opposite Party No.2) shall entertain that fresh application and he shall dispose of the same as per law preferably within a period of three months from the date of filing of the application along with the certified copy of this order making it clear that, the 1^st application shall not be a bar for entertaining a 2^nd application on the basis of this order.

¶20

As such, the writ petition is disposed of finally.

¶21

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted to the petitioner on proper application.

¶22

( A.C. Behera ) Judge

¶23

Jagabandhu

¶24

Signature Not Verified

¶25

Digitally Signed Signed by: JAGABANDHU BEHERA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: OHC, CUTTACK Date: 04-Sep-2025 17:01:07

¶26

Page 2 of 2

Bandani Patnaik v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bandani Patnaik v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anil Rout Vs Principal Secy. to Govt. of Odisha, R and DM Dept., Bbsr

Kangali Charan Sasmal Vs Sanjay Kumar Panda,Tahasildar,Jaleswar

Solomon Sahu Vs State of Odisha

Debaraj Mohanty Vs State of Orissa

Amar Ranjan Mohanty Vs the Inspector General of Registration, Odisha

Dhirendra Kumar Panda Vs the Inspector General of Registration, Odisha, Cuttack