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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ Petition disposed of with a direction to Opposite Party No.04 (Block Development Officer, Udala) to consider the Petitioners' representation at Annexure-07 within two weeks of receipt of a copy of the order together with a copy of the writ petition, after giving an opportunity of hearing to Opposite Party No.05, and to convey the result thereof to the Petitioners and Opposite Party No.5; no view taken on the veracity of the allegations.

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition is maintainable; learned counsel for the State submitted that it is not maintainable and premature. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Opposite Party No.04 (Block Development Officer, Udala) is directed to consider the Petitioners' representation at Annexure-07 within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order along with a copy of the writ petition, after giving an opportunity of hearing to Opposite Party No.05 as well.

Key takeaways

The result of the BDO's consideration shall be conveyed to the Petitioners and to Opposite Party No.5.ratio¶35
This Court expressly did not express any view on the veracity of the allegations made in Annexure-07; the question of the truth of the allegations is thereby left open.obiter¶37

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (Civil) No.2590 of 2026, High Court of Orissa at Cuttack (V. Narasingh, J.), order dated 27.01.2026 - Nine Ward Members of Nuagaon G.P., Udala Block (Mayurbhanja district), alleging that the Naib Sarpanch (Opposite Party No.5), against whom a no-confidence motion had been initiated, was allocating developmental works in hot haste and syphoning public money, and alleging inaction by the Block Development Officer (Opposite Party No.04) on their representation dated 08.01.2026 (Annexure-7), sought intervention of the Court; counsel for the State contended the petition was not maintainable and premature. The Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the BDO to consider the Annexure-07 representation within two weeks of receipt of a copy of the order and of the writ petition, after affording Opposite Party No.05 an opportunity of hearing, and to convey the result to the Petitioners and Opposite Party No.5; the Court expressly expressed no view on the veracity of the allegations in Annexure-07.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C) No.2590 of 2026

1. Sukura Singh

…. Petitioners

2. Laxmimani Behera

3. Lambodara Nayak

4. Hemant Kumar Dakua

5. Pragasmita Patra

6. Gurubari Singh

7. Karmi Hembram

8. Rebati Hembram

9. Rani Murmu

Mr. M. K. Pati, Advocate

-versus-

1. State of Odisha

…. Opposite Parties

2. Collector, Mayurbhanja

3. Sub-Collector & SDM, Aptipada, Udala

4. Block Development Officer, Udala

5. Smt. Gunduri Singh

Mr. M. R. Mohanty, AGA

CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH

Order

No.

01.

ORDER

27.01.2026

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and learned counsel for the Opposite Parties.

It is submitted by the learned counsel that the Petitioners are the 9 Ward Members of Nuagaon, G.P. under Udala Block.

Page 1 of 3

It is stated by the learned counsel for the Petitioners that the said G.P. consists of 11 Ward Members. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that notwithstanding the initiation of no confidence motion against Opposite Party No.5 (Naib Sarpanch), she is allocating developmental works in hot haste which is ex facie illegal. 5. It is further submitted that ventilating their grievance, the Petitioners have moved the Block Development Officer (BDO)-Opposite Party No.04 as per representation dated 08.01.2026 vide Annexure-7.

Alleging inaction in considering such representation and also asserting that there is syphoning of public money by Opposite Party No.5, who has lost the confidence of the ward members, the interference of this Court is sought.

Learned counsel for the State submits that the writ petition is not maintainable and premature. 8. Considering the rival submissions, the Opposite Party No.04 is directed to consider the representation of the Petitioners at Annexure-07 within a period of two weeks hence from the date of receipt of copy of this order along with a copy of the writ petition, after giving an opportunity of hearing to Opposite Party No.05 as well. The result

Page 2 of 3

thereof shall be conveyed to the Petitioners and Opposite Party No.5.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any view regarding the veracity of the allegations made in Annexure-07.

U.C.C. in course of the day.

(V. NARASINGH) Judge

Jina

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed Signed by: JINA DIGAL Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 27-Jan-2026 16:51:18

Page 3 of 3