Disposed¶27

Balaram Besan v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC17 Apr 2025WP(C)/6810/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Balaram Besan v. State of Odisha & Others, W.P.(C) No. 6810 of 2025, High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, Justice M.S. Sahoo, disposed on 17.04.2025. Refusal by District Sub-Registrar, Sambalpur to register sale deed dated 14.01.2025; petitioner directed to seek permission/clarification from authority under Odisha Land Reforms Act, 1960 (OLR Act), incl. competence of Registering Authority to refuse registration u/s. 22 OLR Act raised by ASC; authority to act independently, free of Sub-Registrar's observations, and decide expeditiously.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with directions: petitioner to apply to the authority under the OLR Act for necessary clarification/permission; that authority to decide independently, uninfluenced by the District Sub-Registrar's order dated 14.01.2025, and expeditiously in accordance with law.

Balaram Besan Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶27

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, belonging to the scheduled caste category and aggrieved by the return/refusal of registration of his sale deed dated 14.01.2025 by the District Sub-Registrar, Sambalpur, should seek necessary permission/clarification from the appropriate revenue authority under the Odisha Land Reforms Act, 1960.

¶16

Court's answer

The petitioner, if so advised, is directed to approach the authority under the OLR Act for necessary clarification/permission by making an application for the said purpose.

¶23

Ratio / Principle

The authority dealing with the petitioner's application shall not be influenced in any manner by the observations of the District Sub-Registrar in his order dated 14.01.2025 refusing to register the sale deed.

¶26

Key takeaways

The revenue authority under the OLR Act shall act independently and proceed in accordance with law to consider the grievance of the petitioner expeditiously.ratio¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (W.P.(C) No. 6810 of 2025, High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, Justice M.S. Sahoo, order dated 17.04.2025) - Disposed of. Petitioner Balaram Besan, belonging to the scheduled caste category, was aggrieved by the return of a sale deed dated 14.01.2025 (executed by the petitioner-in-law) by the Registering Authority, District Sub-Registrar, Sambalpur, refusing registration. Considering the limited nature of the grievance, the Court directed the petitioner, if so advised, to approach the appropriate revenue authority under the Odisha Land Reforms Act, 1960 (OLR Act) for necessary permission/clarification. It was further directed that the authority dealing with the application shall not be influenced in any manner by the observations of the District Sub-Registrar in his order dated 14.01.2025 refusing registration, and that the revenue authority under the OLR Act shall act independently and proceed in accordance with law to consider the petitioner's grievance expeditiously.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No. 6810 of 2025

¶3

Balaram Besan ….

¶4

Petitioner

¶5

Mr. P.K. Nayak, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

State of Odisha & Others

…. Opp. Parties

Mr. P.K.Sahoo, ASC

CORAM:

JUSTICE M.S.SAHOO

¶12

ORDER

¶13

17.04.2025

¶14

Order No. Hybrid Mode 01. 1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner.

¶15

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the

¶16

petitioner that the petitioner belongs to category of scheduled caste, he is aggrieved by return of the sale deed by the Registering Authority, District Sub-Registrar, Sambalpur refusing to register the said deed dated

¶17

14.01.2025 executed by the petitioner-in-law.

¶18

2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner shall approach the appropriate

¶19

Page 1 of 3

¶20

revenue authority under the Odisha Land Reforms Act, 1960 (OLR Act) for necessary permission/clarification.

¶21

It is submitted that though the petitioner has not stated anything regarding approach the authority in view of earlier orders passed by this Court by several coordinate Benches, petitioner shall approach the authority under the OLR Act seeking appropriate direction.

¶22

Learned ASC in response submits that the Registering Authority is competent to refuse registration u/s. 22 of OLR Act. However, the petitioner as entitled under the relevant statute, has the right to approach the authority under the statute for necessary permission/clarification under the OLR Act.

¶23

4. Having heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned ASC, considering materials on record and limited nature of grievance raised by the petitioner, it is directed that the petitioner if so advised, shall approach the authority under the OLR Act for necessary clarification/permission as would

¶24

be sought for by the petitioner by making an application for

¶25

Page 2 of 3

¶26

the said purpose. It is further directed that the authority while dealing with the application of the petitioner shall not be influenced in any manner by the observations of the District Sub-Registrar in his order dated 14.01.2025 refusing to register the sale deed executed by the petitioner. It is also directed that the revenue authority under the OLR Act shall act independently and proceed in accordance with law to consider the grievance of the petitioner expeditiously.

¶27

5. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶28

(M.S.Sahoo) Judge

¶29

dutta

¶30

Signature Not Verified

¶31

Digitally Signed Signed by: AJIT KUMAR DUTTA Reason: Authentication Location: ohc Date: 08-Jul-2025 21:41:36

¶32

Page 3 of 3

Balaram Besan v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balaram Besan 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jambue Oram Vs State of Odisha

Basanti Devi @ Sadhangi Vs the Branch Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India (Lic),. Cuttack

Jagadish Prasad Sahu Vs State of Odisha

Pramila Manjari Sahoo @ Sahu Vs Sub-Collector, Bhubaneswar

Rajiv Nayan Choudhary Vs State of Odisha

Mohammad Mustakim Raza Vs Chief Vigilance Officer, Vigilance Dept., Mumbai