Sarojini Mohanty Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Sarojini Mohanty Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Impugned order dated 01.11.2024 set aside; O.G.L.S. Appeal No.02 of 2016 to be heard afresh on merits by opp. party no.2; petitioner to appear on 16.05.2025 without seeking adjournment; appeal to be disposed of within three months of the petitioner's appearance, failing which the impugned order shall revive.

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned order dated 01.11.2024 of the Revenue Divisional Commissioner dismissing O.G.L.S. Appeal No.02 of 2016 for the petitioner's non-appearance should be set aside so as to afford the petitioner an opportunity to contest the appeal.

Court's answer

The impugned order dated 01.11.2024 passed by opp. party no.2 in O.G.L.S. Appeal No.02 of 2016 is set aside, and the said appeal shall be heard afresh by opp. party no.2 on merits.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is directed to appear before opp. party no.2 on 16.05.2025, shall not seek any adjournment and shall cooperate for early disposal; the appeal is to be disposed of within three months from the date of appearance of the petitioner.

Key takeaways

If the petitioner does not appear before opp. party no.2 on 16.05.2025, the impugned order dated 01.11.2024 shall revive.ratio¶34
The Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of O.G.L.S. Appeal No.02 of 2016.obiter¶36

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition — O.G.L.S. Appeal dismissed for non-appearance — impugned order dated 01.11.2024 of the Revenue Divisional Commissioner (Central Division), Cuttack in O.G.L.S. Appeal No.02 of 2016, confirming the Collector's order declining patta after resumption of the leased-out land u/s 3(B) of the OGLS Act by the Additional Tahasildar (order dated 25.02.2022) for non-possession, vacancy and want of proof of salami payment — appeal pending since 2016 saw repeated adjournments owing to the P.O. being busy and non-receipt of the L.C.R., and the petitioner remained absent on the last three dates despite a last chance on 06.09.2024 — HELD: in the interest of justice and to afford an opportunity of hearing, the impugned order was set aside and the appeal directed to be heard afresh on merits; petitioner to appear on 16.05.2025 without seeking adjournment and to cooperate for early disposal; opp. party no.2 to dispose of the appeal within three months of the petitioner's appearance; on failure to appear, the impugned order shall revive; the Court expressed no opinion on the merits of the appeal. Writ petition disposed of.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.2718 of 2025

Sarojini Mohanty ..... Petitioner

Mr. Chitta Ranjan Pattnaik, Advocate

- versus -

1. State of Odisha 2. Revenue Divisional Commissioner Central, Cuttack

3. Collector, Khurda

4. Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar

..... Opposite Parties Mr. Gyanalok Mohanty, Standing Counsel

CORAM:

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA

ORDER Order No.

06.05.2025

This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode).

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SIPUN BEHERA Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 08-May-2025 12:10:10

The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the order dated 01.11.2024 passed by the Revenue Divisional Commissioner (Central Division), Cuttack, opp. party no.2 in O.G.L.S. Appeal No.02 of 2016 under Annexure-9 in dismissing the appeal. The order dated 01.11.2024 is quoted herein below:

Page 1 of 5

“The Case Record is put up today. The AGP is present for the State. The Counsel for the Petitioner is absent. Last chance for appearance was ordered on 06.09.2024. But today also Petitioner/Counsel for Petitioner fails to appear. Hence, case is decided as per plaint and records submitted. It is seen from the impugned order of the Collector that Additional Tahasildar vide order date 25.02.2022 had resumed the leased out land u/s-3(B) of OGLS Act on grounds of not possessing the same and the land laying vacant. No proof of payment of salami has also been produced before Collector. On the above basis, Collector had dropped the case as not possible to issue patta in favour of the appellant vide impugned order. Hence, the order requires no interference. Case is dismissed accordingly.”

As per the order dated 25.02.2025, learned counsel for the petitioner has filed the certified copy of the order sheet of O.G.L.S. Appeal No.02 of 2016 of the Court of Revenue Divisional Commissioner, Central Division, Cuttack, opp. party no.2 with a memo, which is taken on record.

On perusal of the order sheet, it appears that notice was issued to all the parties on 21.10.2016 including the concerned Tahasildar and Collector and thereafter, the case was posted to 23.12.2016, 10.02.2017, 07.04.2017, 26.05.2017, 28.07.2016 and on all those dates, the P.O. was busy otherwise and for that reason, the case could not be taken up.

Page 2 of 5

On 11.10.2019, the petitioner’s counsel was not present so also the opp. parties and the LCR was not received for which, the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar, opp. party no.4 was asked to submit the L.C.R.

On 05.02.2021, the counsel for the petitioner was absent and on the next date i.e. 16.04.2021, the counsel for the petitioner was present but since the L.C.R. was not submitted by the Collector, reminder was sent and thereafter, the case was taken up on 26.04.2024. On the said date, learned counsel for the petitioner was present and he also filed the written note of submission. However, since the L.C.R. was not received in spite of reminders, another reminder was sent. On next three dates, i.e. 21.06.2024, 06.09.2024 and 01.11.2024, learned counsel for the petitioner was not present and it appears from the order dated 06.09.2024 that last chance was given for appearance of the petitioner and submission of documents.

On 01.11.2024, when the case was taken up, the opp. party no.2 passed the impugned order on the basis of plaint and records submitted and the Collector’s order was confirmed.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order sheet would indicate that most of the times, the

Page 3 of 5

case could not be taken up either the P.O. was busy otherwise or non-receipt of the L.C.R. and on some dates, the counsel for the petitioner was present and on the last three dates, the petitioner could not take steps inadvertently. He further submits that the petitioner is now ready and willing to cooperate with the Court for early disposal of the O.G.L.S. Appeal and therefore, the impugned order be set aside and the petitioner may be given a chance to contest the case before the opp. party no.2.

Learned counsel for the State has no serious objection to such prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, in the interest of justice & in order to afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the impugned order dated 01.11.2024 passed by the opp. party no.2 in O.G.L.S. Appeal No.02 of 2016 is hereby set aside. The said Appeal shall be heard afresh by the opp. party no.2 on merits.

The petitioner is directed to appear before the opp. party no.2 on 16.05.2025 and he shall not seek for any adjournment and cooperate with the opp. party no.2 for early disposal of the appeal. The opp. party no.2 shall ensure that the appeal be disposed of within a period of

Page 4 of 5

three months from the date of appearance of the petitioner.

It is made clear that if the petitioner does not appear before the opp. party no.2 on 16.05.2025, the impugned order dated 01.11.2024 shall revive.

Let a free copy of the order be handed over to the learned counsel for the State, who in turn shall intimate the opp. parties to take steps on the date fixed before opp. party no.2.

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the O.G.L.S. Appeal No.02 of 2016.

With such observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.

Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.

(S.K. Sahoo)

Judge

(S.S. Mishra)

Judge

Sipun

Page 5 of 5