Disposed¶22

Harinath Singh v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC15 Apr 2026WP(C)/1354/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Odisha HC writ petition disposed 15.04.2026; Harinath Singh v. State of Odisha; mandamus sought against DFO (O.P. No.2) for cutting order and T.T. permit for 52 Sal trees, Plot No.11, Khata No.67, Mouza Akhupal; Form-III under Rule 7(a), Odisha Timber Transit Rules; application dated 17.02.2023 undisposed; Court directed decision within three months; petitioner to supply further documents promptly; no opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to opposite party No.2 to decide the petitioner's application dated 17.02.2023 within three months, with the petitioner to furnish any further required documents without delay. ¶22

Harinath Singh Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.1354 of 2025

¶3

Harinath Singh …. Petitioner

¶4

Mr. Panchanan Panigrahi, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha & others …. Opp. Parties

¶7

Ms. Suvalaxmi Devi , ASC

¶8

CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA

Order No.

ORDER

15.04.2026

1. Heard Mr. Panigrahi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Suvalaxmi Devi, learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State.

¶14

2. The present writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:

¶15

“ to pass an order in favour of the petitioner, the relevant records may be called for and after hearing from the Opp. Parties, the writ petition may be allowed;

¶16

And a writ of mandamus may be issued commanding the Opp. Parties especially O.P. No.2/ DFO for issuance of cutting order as well as grant T.T. Permit in favour of the petitioner as per application dt. 17.02.2023 within a stipulated period as per law.”

¶17

3. The petitioner on 17.02.2023 vide Annexure-1 had applied for cutting of 52 nos. of Sal trees standing

¶18

Page 1 of 2

¶19

on his plot bearing Plot No.11, Khata No.67, MouzaAkhupal. He has filled up the Form-III under Rule-7(a) of the Odisha Timber Transit Rules. His grievance is that despite completion of entire formalities, his application dated 17.02.2023 vide Annexure-1 has not yet been disposed of by the opposite party no.2. Hence, he seeks indulgence of this Court.

¶20

4. Regard being had to the averments made in this writ petition and taking into consideration the submissions made by both learned counsels for the petitioner as well as State, the present writ petition is disposed of directing the opposite party No.2 to decide the application of the petitioner dated 17.02.2023 within a period of three months hence.

¶21

5. It is made clear that, if the petitioner is so required to submit any other necessary documents to the opposite party no.2, he shall do so without delay, so that his application would be decided expeditiously.

¶22

6. With the aforementioned observation, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶23

7. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

¶24

Signature Not Verified

¶25

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBHASIS MOHANTYDesignation: Personal AssistantSubhasis Judge Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 15-Apr-2026 19:43:34

¶26

Page 2 of 2

Harinath Singh v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harinath Singh 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

Mirza Abdul Wahib Ba Vs State

Nandalal Bhoi Vs State

Dayanidhi Vs State

Bhima Rohidas Vs Haripriya Rohidas @ Chinmayee Rohidas

Diptimayee Panda Vs Anil Panda

Rabikar @ Rabikara Padhan Vs State of Odisha