Disposed¶26

Birabhadra Mahana v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC10 Oct 2025WP(C)/27191/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Extension of time; I.A. No.21637 of 2025 in disposed W.P.(C) No.27191 of 2025 (Birabhadra Mahana v. State of Odisha); appeal to appellate authority under Odisha Survey Settlement Rules 1962 / Odisha Mutation Manual, 1962; appeal memo not accepted after four-week period expired; lenient-view final three-week extension granted 12.01.2026 with bar on further extension; High Court of Orissa at Cuttack; Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo, J.; Alok Kumar Panda for petitioner, P.K. Mohanty ASC for State.

What did the court decide?

I.A. No.21637 of 2025 disposed of with a final extension of three weeks to the petitioner to file the appeal before the appellate authority under the Odisha Survey Settlement Rules 1962 read with the Odisha Mutation Manual, 1962; no further extension of time to be granted; urgent certified copy to issue as per rules. ¶26

Birabhadra Mahana Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner should be granted further time, beyond the four weeks allowed by the order dated 10.10.2025, to file his appeal before the appellate authority under the Odisha Survey Settlement Rules 1962 read with the Odisha Mutation Manual, 1962, given that the authorities were not accepting his appeal memo after expiry of the period.

¶21

Ratio / Principle

Having heard both sides and taking a lenient view despite the Additional Standing Counsel's objection that sufficient time had already been granted, the Court granted the petitioner a further three weeks' time to file the appeal.

¶24

Key takeaways

The Court clarified that no further extension of time beyond the additional three weeks shall be granted, and directed the parties to act on production of the website copy of the order obtained from the official website.ratio¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Orissa at Cuttack (Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo, J.), order dated 12.01.2026: In I.A. No.21637 of 2025 filed in the writ petition W.P.(C) No.27191 of 2025 (disposed of on 10.10.2025), the petitioner Birabhadra Mahana sought extension of time to file his appeal before the appellate authority under the Odisha Survey Settlement Rules 1962 read with the Odisha Mutation Manual, 1962, having failed to file within four weeks of the earlier order due to personal difficulty, after which the authorities declined to accept his appeal memo. Overruling the Additional Standing Counsel's contention that sufficient time had already been granted, the Court, taking a lenient view, granted a further three weeks to file the appeal and clarified that no further extension of time would be granted; parties to act on the website copy of the order.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.27191 of 2025

¶3

Birabhadra Mahana

¶4

Petitioner

¶5

Mr. Alok Kumar Panda, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

State of Odisha and others

¶8

…. Opp. Parties

¶9

Mr. P.K. Mohanty, ASC

¶10

CORAM: JUSTICE MRUGANKA SEKHAR SAHOO

ORDER

12.01.2026

(Hybrid Mode)

I.A. No.21637 of 2025

¶15

Order No.

¶16

02.

¶17

1 . Copy of the I.A. has been served on the learned Additional Standing Counsel for the opposite parties-State.

¶18

2 . Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶19

3. The I.A. has been filed in the disposed of writ petition W.P. (C) No.27191 of 2025 disposed of on 10.10.2025.

¶20

It is submitted that in terms of the said order dated 10.10.2025, the petitioner was to file the appeal before the appellate authority under the Odisha Survey Settlement Rules 1962 read with Odisha Mutation Manual, 1962 within four weeks. Due to personal difficulty, the petitioner has not been able to file the same within four weeks from 10.10.2025.

¶21

4 . It is submitted by Mr. Panda, learned counsel that after the period of four weeks was over, the authorities are not accepting his appeal memo for consideration.

¶22

Page 1 of 2

¶23

5 . The learned Additional Standing Counsel in response submits that sufficient time was granted and no further time may be granted.

¶24

6 . Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Standing Counsel taking a lenient view, this Court grants further three weeks time to the petitioner to file the appeal.

¶25

It is further clarified that no further extension of time shall be granted. Parties to act upon production of the website copy of the order obtained from the official website.

¶26

7. The I.A. is disposed of.

¶27

Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.

¶28

(Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo) Judge

¶29

Jyostna

¶30

Signature Not Verified

¶31

Digitally Signed Signed by: JYOSTNARANI MAJHEE Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 15-Jan-2026 18:57:45