Gobinda Kumar Patro v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC11 Sept 2025WP(C)/6826/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bench Mark Valuation; District Level Valuation Committee (DLVC); Ganjam; enhancement by percentage exceeding 100%; Odisha Stamp Rules 1952 — Rules 37, 37-A, 38, 39, 40, 40(2), 41, 41-A, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47; clause (x) and (a-i) of Rule 37; expert valuer nominee; Collector-cum-Chairman 10% enhancement; biennial revision; quashing of valuation resolution; application of mind; Article 226/227; writ of mandamus; statutory procedure; AIR 2009 (Orissa) 172 (DB); 2013 (I) OLR 344; W.P.(C) No.1831 of 2025.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed; impugned Annexure-1 (report of DLVC, Ganjam dated 01.02.2024) quashed; Opposite Parties directed to follow the guidelines and directions given by this Court in the judgments dated 22.08.2025 in W.P.(C) No.1831 of 2025 with its connected similar matters. ¶¶78

Gobinda Kumar Patro Vs State of Odisha — Writ and Judicial Review | Orissa HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶78

Issue for consideration

Whether the DLVC, Ganjam resolution dated 01.02.2024 (Annexure-1) enhancing the Bench Mark Valuation of immovable properties by percentages exceeding 100%, without fixing revised valuations and without application of mind, is in accordance with law and liable to be quashed. +1 more

¶¶19

Court's answer

Rules 40 and 41 of the Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952 confer no power on the DLVC to enhance the Bench Mark Valuation by way of percentage; the DLVC can only fix the Bench Mark Valuation through its revision as per law.

¶¶50

Ratio / Principle

Rules 40 and 41 provide for revision of the Bench Mark Valuation by the DLVC for the next two years by fixing the same, not through enhancement by way of percentage like the Collector.

¶¶51

Key takeaways

Only the Collector-cum-Chairman of the DLVC is empowered under law to enhance 10 per cent on the previously fixed Bench Mark Valuation, in case of the failure of the DLVC to fix another Bench Mark Valuation through revision.ratio¶¶68
The 10 per cent enhancement made by the Collector-cum-Chairman of the DLVC remains in force only until the fixation of another Bench Mark Valuation through revision by the DLVC.ratio¶¶68
Annexure-1 does not reveal compliance with clause (x) and (a-i) of Rule 37 regarding inclusion by the Chairman-cum-Collector of nominees into the DLVC, including one preferably an expert valuer familiar with valuation of land, buildings and other immovable properties.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Orissa High Court (A.C. Behera, J.) allowed W.P.(C) No.6826 of 2025 (Gobinda Kumar Patro v. State of Odisha & Others) and quashed Annexure-1, the DLVC Ganjam report dated 01.02.2024, which enhanced the Bench Mark Valuation of immovable properties across the Sub-Divisions and Tahasils of Ganjam District by percentages exceeding 100%. Held: under Rules 40 and 41 of the Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952 the District Level Valuation Committee is empowered only to fix the Bench Mark Valuation biennially through revision; it has no power to enhance valuation by percentage. That power vests solely in the Collector-cum-Chairman, who may enhance 10% only upon the DLVC's failure to revise, and such enhancement holds good only until a fresh revision by the DLVC. Annexure-1 also failed to reveal compliance with clause (x) and (a-i) of Rule 37 (constitution of the committee with two nominated public persons, one preferably an expert valuer) and disclosed no application of mind or reasons for the unanimous enhancement. Applying Guruprasad Mohanty v. State of Odisha, AIR 2009 (Orissa) 172 (DB) and Capital Bar Association / Hrudananda Mangaraj, 2013 (I) OLR 344, the Annexure-1 was quashed; Opposite Parties were directed to follow the guidelines and directions in this Court's judgment dated 22.08.2025 in W.P.(C) No.1831 of 2025.

¶1

ORISSA HIGH COURT : CUTTACK

¶2

WP(C) No.6826 of 2025

¶3

An application under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution

¶4

of India.

¶5

¶6

Gobinda Kumar Patro .......…… Petitioner

¶7

-VERSUS-

¶8

State of Odisha & Others …….. Opposite Parties Counsel appeared for the parties:

¶9

For the Petitioner : Mr.S.K.Jethy, Adv. For the Opposite Parties : Mr.Gyanalok Mohanty, S.C.

¶10

P R E S E N T:

¶11

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA

¶12

Date of Hearing: 11.09.2025 :: Date of Judgment : 11.09.2025

¶13

A.C. Behera, J. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the

¶14

Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the Petitioner

¶15

praying for quashing the Annexure-1 (report of District Level

¶16

Valuation Committee), Ganjam dated 01.02.2024 on the

¶17

ground that, the same is not in accordance with law.

¶18

2. I have already heard from the learned Senior Advocate for the Petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the Opposite Parties.

¶19

3. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that, when the District Level Valuation Committee (DLVC), Ganjam as per its resolution dated 01.02.2024 vide Annexure-1 has enhanced the Bench Mark Valuation of the immovable properties in different areas of Ganjam District under different Sub-Divisions and Tahasils to the exorbitant percentages much more than 100 per cent without application of the minds of the members of the DLVC, and without following the due procedures of law, the same is liable to be quashed.

¶20

To which, the learned Standing Counsel objected contending that, Annexure-1 has been prepared by the members of the District Level Valuation Committee (DLVC), Ganjam as per law, for the same is not liable to be quashed.

¶21

Page 2 of 12

¶22

4. Rule 37 of The Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952 provides about the constitution of District Level Committee and Sub-District (Tahasil Level) Valuation Committee and also about its Chairman and Members.

¶23

As per the said Rule 37 of The Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952, the Chairman of the District Level Valuation Committee (DLVC) is Collector. The Chairman-cum-Collector of the DLVC shall nominate two public persons, as the nominees and one of the nominees of the Chairman be preferably an expert valuer or an expert familiar with principles and practices of valuation of land, buildings and other immovable properties and the tenure of such nominated members shall be two years.

¶24

Rule 37-A of the said Rules provides that, the District Valuation Committee may utilize the services of professional life chartered values for assisting in revision of market value guideline.

¶25

Rules 38 and 39 of The Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952 provide about functions to be performed by the District Valuation Committee and Sub-District Valuation Committee.

¶26

Rule 40 of The Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952 provides that, the market value guidelines prepared under the chapter shall be issued as soon as they are prepared and shall thereafter be revised biennially from the 1^st April. But, in case, the Committee fails to revise the valuation, the Collector as Chairman would enhance the value by ten per cent (10%) of the value so fixed.

¶27

Rule 41 of The Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952 provides about the procedure for preparation of set of market value. As per Rule 41, while working out the values of immovable properties, the respective Committee shall take into account the principle of valuation mentioned in clause (a) of Rule 39 and Appendix II and such other instructions issued by the Government and Inspector General of Registration from time to time.

¶28

Page 3 of 12

¶29

Rule 41-A of The Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952 provides that, notwithstanding contained anything in these rules under this chapter, the State Government may engage reputed professional agency to examine the procedure for fixation of market value guideline regarding proper value of the properties in any particular area or areas under such terms and conditions as considered proper for being taken into consideration by the Committee for such area/areas.

¶30

Rule 42 of the Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952 provides that, the sale statistics of the property for urban area and rural area shall be prepared in from Nos.5 and 6 respectively and shall be submitted by the Registering Officer to the Sub-District Valuation Committee.

¶31

The engineering department shall prepare the sale statistics of the properties in form No.7 and submit the same to the District Committee as well as Sub-District Committee.

¶32

As per Rule 43 of the said Rules, set of market value of the property shall be made available to each Registering Officer by the convenor of the District Valuation Committee.

¶33

As per Rule 44 of the said Rules, notwithstanding anything contained in these rules, the Chairman of the District Committee may order for a special revision of (Set of market value of the properties) in any specified area under his jurisdiction in the following circumstances leading to sudden changes of property value for the following reasons:-

¶34

(a) Setting up of an industry or group of industries or infrastructure projects;

¶35

(b) Development of large scale housing projects;

¶36

(c) Any other special circumstances having an

¶37

impact on the values of immovable property in any specified area.

¶38

Page 4 of 12

¶39

Rule 45 of the Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952 provides that, the Committee after serving of the notices on the public, public officers, if they think fit to do so, record the statement of the persons and for the purpose of enquiry:

¶40

(a) May call for any information or record from any public office or officers or Authority under the State/Central Government or any local authority or statutory authority.

¶41

(b) May record statement from any Member of the public office or authority as mentioned under Clause (a);

¶42

(c) May call the parties to be present on the date specified in the notice and on such other date as may be fixed by it.

¶43

Rule 46 of the said Rules provides that, if any representation is received from parties aggrieved by the rates shown in the (Set of market value of the properties) or if any officer of the department notices anomaly, the same shall be referred to the Committee by the Chairman for final decision.

¶44

Rule 47 of the said Rules provides that, it shall be within the competency of Inspector-General of Registration to issue such administrative instructions of general nature as may be required from time to time for the effective implementation of the rules under the said Chapter VI.

¶45

5. The provisions of law envisaged in Rules 40 and 41 of The

¶46

Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952 provide that,

¶47

“The District Level Valuation Committee constituted according to Rule 37 shall fix the Bench Mark Valuation revising the same biennially before elapsing two years of the fixation of previous valuation. Because, the valuation fixed by the valuation committee shall ordinarily continue for two years, unless there is special revision of the same by the Chairman of District valuation committee i.e. Collector to

¶48

Page 5 of 12

¶49

enhance the same for any of the circumstances envisaged in Rule 44. But, if for any reason, the District Level Valuation Committee (DLVC) fails to revise the Bench Mark Valuation for next two years, the Collector-cum-Chairman of the DLVC can enhance ten per cent on the Bench Mark Valuation of previous two years fixed by the DLVC.”

¶50

6. Therefore, the provisions of law envisaged in the Rules 40 and 41 of The Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952 do not provide any power to the District Level Valuation Committee (DLVC) for enhancement of the Bench Mark Valuation by way of percentage like the Collector-cum-Chairman of the District Valuation Committee, because, the DLVC can only fix the Bench Mark Valuation through its revision as per law.

¶51

7. So, the provisions of law envisaged in Rule 40 and 41 provide for the revision of the Bench Mark Valuation by the DLVC for next two years by fixing the same, but, not through enhancement by way of percentage like the Collector.

¶52

8. Here, in this matter at hand, as per Annexure-1, the District Level Valuation Committee (DLVC) constituted by the Opposite Parties has enhanced the Bench Mark Valuation of the immovable properties of different Sub-Divisions and Tahasils of Ganjam District by way of percentage without

¶53

Page 6 of 12

¶54

fixing the specific valuation in area wise through revision for the next two years.

¶55

That apart, Annexure-1 of DLVC does not reveal about the compliance of the provisions of clause (x) and (a-i) of Rule 37 of The Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952 regarding the inclusion of the nominees into the committee of the DLVC by the Chairman-cum-Collector taking one an expert valuer or an expert familar with the principle and practices of valuation of land and buildings and other immovable properties to the said DLVC.

¶56

9. On this aspect, the propositions of law has already been clarified in the ratio of the following decisions:-

¶57

(i) In a case between Guruprasad Mohanty and another Vrs. State of Odisha & Others reported in AIR 2009 (Orissa) 172 (D.B.) in Para 18 that,

¶58

the DLVC while fixing market value guidelines shall take into consideration all the criteria as prescribed in Appendix-II of The Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952.

¶59

As it reveals the Bench Mark Valuation was fixed by the Committee in the year 2006, the Committee had not fixed another Bench Mark Valuation for the year 2008 and it was only enhanced, as prescribed under Rule 40(2) of The Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952, which is not inconformity with law. Because, As per Rule 40(2) of The Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952, if the District Valuation Committee fails to revise the Bench Mark Valuation after expiry of two years period, the Collector

¶60

Page 7 of 12

¶61

can enhance the value by 10 per cent on the value fixed earlier by the DLVC.

¶62

So, the District Valuation Committee has no power to enhance the value by way of percentage, but, only the Collector has power to enhance 10 per cent of the value on the value for the previous two years on failure of the District Valuation Committee for fixing another Bench Mark Valuation for next two years.

¶63

Therefore, the enhancement of the Bench Mark Valuation by the Committee was not made in accordance with the statutory provisions. For which, the same is quashed and directed to appropriate authorities to take step for fixation of the valuation of the land taking into account to the Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952.

¶64

(ii) In a case between Capital Bar Association, Bhubaneswar Vrs. State of Orissa & two Others and Hrudananda Mangaraj and another Vrs. Commissionercum-Secretary, R & DM Department, Odisha and three others reported in 2013 (I) OLR 344 that,

¶65

Rule 37 of the Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952 provides that, two public persons are to be nominated by the Chairman to the District Valuation Committee and as per the note to the said rule, one of the nominees between the said two persons be preferably an expert valuer or an expert familiar with principles and practices of valuation of land, building and other immovable properties.

¶66

When, it is found that, Rule 37 of the Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952 has not been complied with for the Constitution of the District Valuation Committee, for which, the resolution passed by the District Valuation Committee without complying the provisions of rule 37 thereof cannot be sustainable under law. Therefore, the impugned notification dated 31.08.2012 is hereby quashed and the matter was remitted back to the District Level Valuation Committee (DLVC), Khordha for fresh consideration of the said matter in accordance with law and to complete the entire process of fixing revised Bench Mark Valuation as early as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of said judgment.

¶67

Page 8 of 12

¶68

10. Here, in this matter at hand, when, the Annexure-1 (which is impugned in this writ petition) do not reveal about the fixation of Bench Mark Valuation through revision for the year 2024-2026 revising the same by the DLVC as per rules through properly constituted committee of the DLVC inconformity with the Rule 37 of the Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952 and when instead of fixing Bench Mark Valuation in Annexure-1, there is enhancement on the earlier Bench Mark Valuation in area wise by way of percentage and when, provisions of law do not empower the DLVC for enhancement of the Bench Mark Valuation by way of percentage, but, only empower the DLVC for fixing the Bench Mark Valuation through revision for the next two years and when, only Collector-cum-Chairman of the DLVC is empowered under law to enhance 10 per cent on the previously fixed Bench Mark Valuation, in case of the failure of the DLVC to fix another Bench Mark Valuation through revision and when, the said 10 per cent enhancement made by the Collector-cum-Chairman of the DLVC shall remain in force till the fixation of another Bench Mark Valuation through revision by the DLVC and

¶69

Page 9 of 12

¶70

when, Annexure-1 prepared by the DLVC does not reveal about the application of the minds of the members of the DLVC, as no proper reason has been assigned in that Annexure-1 regarding the cause of unanimous views of the Members of the DLVC for enhancement of the Bench Mark Valuation, then at this juncture, by applying the principles of law enunciated in the ratio of the aforesaid Division Bench decision of this Court to this matter at hand, it is held that, the enhancement of the Bench Mark Valuation as per Annexure-1 made by the DLVC, Ganjam is not in accordance with the provisions of law for the reasons assigned above.

¶71

11. It is the law that, where a statute provides for a particular procedure to be followed for doing a particular Act in a particular manner, the authority has to follow the same procedures and passing of anything beyond the statutory procedures is not permissible under law.

¶72

12. The law has already been settled that, a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950 is maintainable for enforcing statutory or legal right, when there is complain by the Petitioner that, there is a breach of the

¶73

Page 10 of 12

¶74

statutory duty on the part of the public functionaries like these matters at hand, in that case, the writ jurisdiction can be resorted to compelling the public functionaries like the Opposite Parties for the performance of the statutory duties in accordance with law through a direction in the form of writ of Mandamus.

¶75

13. As per the discussions and observations made above, when it is held that, the impugned Annexure-1 concerning the enhancement of the Bench Mark Valuation in respect of the immovable properties of different villages/areas under different Sub-Divisions and Tahasils in the District of Ganjam has been made by the Opposite Parties without following the statutory provisions of law, then at this juncture, by applying the principles of law enunciated in the ratio of the decisions indicated in Para No.9 of this judgment, the Annexure-1 (prepared by the DLVC) is liable to be quashed.

¶76

14. Therefore, there is merit in the writ petition filed by the Petitioner. The same must succeed.

¶77

Page 11 of 12

¶78

15. In result, the writ petition filed by the Petitioner is allowed.

¶79

16. The impugned Annexure 1 prepared by the DLVC is quashed.

¶80

17. The Opposite Parties are directed to follow the guidelines and directions given by this Court in the judgments dated 22.08.2025 passed in W.P.(C) No.1831 of 2025 analogously on that date with its connected similar matters.

¶81

18. As such, the writ petition is disposed of finally.

¶82

(A.C. Behera), Judge

¶83

Orissa High Court, Cuttack 11^th Of September, 2025/ Binayak Sahoo// Junior Stenographer

¶84

Signature Not Verified

¶85

Digitally Signed Signed by: BINAYAK SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 12-Sep-2025 11:15:52

¶86

Page 12 of 12

Gobinda Kumar Patro v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gobinda Kumar Patro 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sasmita Das Adhikari Vs State of Odisha

P. Ramani Ranjan Vs the Collector Cum District Magistrate, Khurda

Anil Kumar Parida Vs Collector, Kurdha

Bakula Jal Vs Jagamohan Biswal

Kirtan Behera Vs Member,Board of Revenue, Cuttack

Simanchala Gouda Vs State of Odisha