Disposed¶7

Mahanta Nayak v. Settlement Officer, Major Settlement Office, Khurda

Orissa HC10 Oct 2025WP(C)/20757/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Orissa High Court, Cuttack; WP(C) No.20757 of 2025; Mahanta Nayak and others v. Settlement Officer, Major Settlement Office, Khurda; decided 10.10.2025 by Ananda Chandra Behera, J.; Section 22, Orissa Survey and Settlement Act, 1958; settlement operation; rent stage; draft ROR published in vendor's name; purchasers after rent stage; joint application with vendor's consent; RoR correction/recording; appeal during currency of settlement operation; writ disposed of finally with liberty; urgent certified copy.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioners to approach the Settlement Authorities by filing a joint application with the consent and signature of their vendor praying for recording the case land in their names; the Settlement Authorities to entertain and dispose of such application as per law. ¶7

Mahanta Nayak Vs Settlement Officer, Major Settlement Office, Khurda — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶7

Issue for consideration

Whether the Settlement Officer can be directed through writ jurisdiction to accept an appeal from the petitioners during the currency of the settlement operation. +1 more

¶2

Court's answer

Only the Settlement Officer is empowered under Section 22 of the Orissa Survey and Settlement Act, 1958 to entertain an appeal during the currency of settlement operation.

¶4

Ratio / Principle

Since final publication of the RoR has not been made, the writ petition is disposed of finally with liberty to the petitioners to approach the Settlement Authorities by filing a joint application with the consent and signature of their vendor praying for recording the case land in their names.

¶6

Key takeaways

If such a joint application is filed by the petitioners with their vendor, the Settlement Authorities shall entertain it and dispose of it as per law.ratio¶6

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (WP(C) No.20757 of 2025, High Court of Orissa, 10.10.2025, Ananda Chandra Behera, J.) by purchasers of case land after rent stage, where the draft ROR stood in the vendor's name, seeking a direction to the Settlement Officer to accept an appeal during ongoing settlement operation: DISPOSED OF FINALLY. Holding that only the Settlement Officer is empowered under Section 22 of the Orissa Survey and Settlement Act, 1958 to entertain an appeal during the currency of settlement operation, and noting that final publication of the RoR had not been made, the Court granted liberty to the petitioners to approach the Settlement Authorities with a joint application, with the consent and signature of their vendor, praying for recording the case land in their names; the Settlement Authorities were directed to entertain and dispose of such application as per law.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.20757 of 2025

¶2

Mahanta Nayak and others

¶3

..... Petitioners

¶4

Represented By Adv. - Sudhir Kumar Mallick

¶5

-versus-

¶6

Settlement Officer, Major Settlement Office, Khurda and

¶7

.....

¶8

Opposite Parties

¶9

others

¶10

Represented By Adv. –

¶11

Gyanalok Mohanty, SC

¶12

CORAM:

¶13

MR. JUSTICE ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA

ORDER

10.10.2025

Order No.

1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶18

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners praying for directing the Settlement Officer to accept an appeal from the petitioners, as the settlement operation is going on.

¶19

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

¶20

It is very fundamental in law that, only the Settlement Officer is empowered under Section 22 of the Orissa Survey and Settlement Act, 1958 to entertain an appeal during the currency of settlement operation.

¶21

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that, after rent stage, they have purchased the

¶22

Page 1 of 2.

¶23

case land and during rent stage, draft ROR of the case land has been published in the name of their vendor. The petitioners are interested to file a joint application with the consent and signature of their vendor before the Settlement Officer for recording the RoR of the case land in their names correcting the same from the name of their vendor.

¶24

On the basis of the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners, it is felt proper to dispose of this writ petition finally giving liberty to the petitioners to approach the Settlement Authorities by filing a joint application with the consent and signature of their vendor praying for recording the case land in their names, as the final publication of the RoR has not been made.

¶25

In case of filing of joint application by the petitioners with their vendor, the Settlement Authorities shall entertain the same and shall also dispose of the same as per law.

¶26

As such, this writ petition filed by the petitioners is disposed of finally.

¶27

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

¶28

(ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA) Judge

¶29

Utkalika

¶30

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: UTKALIKA NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 13-Oct-2025 18:23:46

¶31

Page 2 of 2.

Mahanta Nayak v. Settlement Officer, Major Settlement Office, Khurda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahanta Nayak v. Settlement Officer, Major Settlement Office, Khurda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saraswati Panigrahi Vs State and Ors.

Manoranjan Panda Vs State and Ors.

Dr.Nrusingha Pr.Moha Vs State and Ors.

Lakhan Lal Sahu Vs State of Odisha

Sudarshan Swain Vs Settlement Officer, Jobra, Cuttack

Bulu Jena Vs Settlement Officer Major Settlement Office, Cuttack