Dismissed¶20

Nityananda Sahoo v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC17 Nov 2025WP(C)/27660/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Orissa High Court, W.P.(C) No.27660 of 2025, order dated 17.11.2025, delivered by Dr. Justice Sanjeeb K Panigrahi. Registered owner challenged challans issued against vehicle OD-02-AJ-1655 alleging inadvertent issuance; the Court held it could not verify the factual question of whether the vehicle ran on the relevant route, declined to entertain the writ petition, granted liberty to approach the appropriate authority, and dismissed the petition. Keywords: challans, registered owner, writ court, factual verification, liberty to approach appropriate authority, Transport Department.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority for redressal of his grievance ¶20

Nityananda Sahoo Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.27660 of 2025

¶3

Nityananda Sahoo

¶4

…. Petitioner(s) Mr. Niranjan Lenka, Adv.

¶5

-versus-

¶6

…. State of Odisha & Ors. Opposite Party(s) Mr. Pravakar Behera, SC for the Transport Department Smt. Sarita Moharana, ASC

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI

¶9

Order ORDER No. 17.11.2025

¶10

¶11

1 . This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.

¶12

2 . In filing this Writ Petition, the Petitioner claiming himself to be the registered owner of the vehicle in question bearing registration No.OD-02-AJ-1655, has challenged the challans issued in respect of the said vehicle.

¶13

3 . Heard.

¶14

4 . Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the above noted vehicle was never run by the Petitioner through the route where the alleged challans are issued. He further contends that the impugned challans have been inadvertently issued in respect of the above noted vehicle.

¶15

Signature Not Verified

¶16

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 19-Nov-2025 19:43:38

¶17

Page 1 of 2

¶18

He, accordingly, prays for allowing the prayer made in this Writ Petition.

¶19

5 . Considering the submission made on behalf of the Petitioner and looking to the prayer made in this Writ Petition, this Court is of the view that the Writ Court cannot verify whether the vehicle in question was run by the Petitioner through the route where the impugned challans are issued, or not? This Court, therefore, declines to entertain the prayer made in this Writ Petition. However, considering the request of learned counsel for the Petitioner, this Court permits the Petitioner to approach the appropriate authority for redressal of his grievance.

¶20

6 . This Writ Petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶21

(Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi) Judge

¶22

Ayaskanta

¶23

Signature Not Verified

¶24

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 19-Nov-2025 19:43:38

¶25

Page 2 of 2

Nityananda Sahoo v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nityananda Sahoo 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

Kailash Ch.Nayak Vs State and Ors.

Jharana Das Vs State of Odisha

Jhudhistira Sethy Vs Union of India

Basanta Patra Vs State of Odisha

Pratap Kumar Das Vs Dhenkanal Municipality, Dhenkanal

Gokula Nanda Bej Vs State of Odisha