Disposed¶22

Anam Bhoi v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC4 Sept 2025WP(C)/22554/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

W.P.(C) No.22554 of 2025, decided 04.09.2025 by R.K. Pattanaik, J.: writ petition disposed of with direction to opposite party No.2 to examine and decide the petitioners' representation (Annexure-1) opposing installation of an Ex-Sarpanch's statue inside the GP office premises, preferably within four weeks, after hearing the petitioners and all persons likely to be affected; no statutes or precedents cited; no costs imposed.

What did the court decide?

Direction to opposite party No.2 to attend to and examine the petitioners' grievance (Annexure-1) and dispose of it preferably within four weeks from receipt of a copy of the order, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and all others likely to be affected. ¶22

Anam Bhoi Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.22554 of 2025

¶3

Anam Bhoi and another …. Petitioners

¶4

Mr. B.P. Patnaik, Advocate

¶5

-Versus-

¶6

State of Odisha and others

¶7

…. Opposite Parties

¶8

Ms. B. Dash, ASC

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK

ORDER

04.09.2025

Order No.

Heard Mr. Patnaik, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Ms. Dash, learned ASC for the State.

¶16

Instant writ petition is filed by the petitioner for a direction to the opposite parties and in particular, opposite party Nos.2 to 4 to take steps to prevent installation of a statue of an Ex-Sarpanch inside the premises of the office of the GP on the grounds stated.

¶17

As it appears, the petitioners have approached opposite party No.2 with their grievance as per Annexure-1. A copy of the invitation card with regard to the event organized vis-à-vis installation of the statue is at Annexure-2 which shows that the same was scheduled to be held on 15^th August, 2025.

¶18

Recorded the submission of Ms. Dash, learned ASC for the State.

¶19

Page 1 of 2

¶20

Considering the submission of Mr. Patnaik, learned counsel for the petitioners that the installation of a statue received objection from all around and the same is illegal and as the grievance of the petitioners, who are the Ward Members approached opposite party No.2 as per Annexure-1, the Court is of the view that a direction is required to be issued to the said authority to attend to the same and examine and to take a decision thereafter within a stipulated period.

¶21

6. Accordingly, it is ordered.

¶22

In the result, the writ petition stands disposed of with the direction as aforesaid to be complied with by opposite party No.2 and after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and all others, who are likely to be affected thereby while considering Annexure-1, to dispose it of preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶23