Disposed

Chandranath Banerjee v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC11 Sept 2026WP(C)/29026/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Orissa allowed a writ application directing the Tahasildar, Vyasanagar, to execute civil court orders regarding the recording of land plots in favour of the petitioner, citing obligation under Rule 35 of the OSS Rules.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Tahasildar, Vyasanagar, to record Plot No. 182/1371 & 184 measuring Ac. 0.68 dec. and Ac. 0.16 dec. in favour of the petitioner within six weeks.

Chandranath Banerjee Vs State of Odisha — Property and Title | Orissa HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C). No.29026 of 2026

¶3

ODHC010691462026

¶4

Chandranath Banerjee

¶5

State of Odisha & Ors

¶6

…. Petitioner

¶7

Represented by Mr. A.N.Das, Senior Advocate with Mr. J.K.Pratihari, Advocate -Versus -

¶8

…. Opposite Party Represented by Mr. G.Mohanty, Standing Counsel

¶9

CORAM: JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA

¶10

Order No. 01.

¶11

ORDER_ 11.09.2026

¶12

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State.

¶14

The petitioner has approached this Court with the following

¶15

prayer:

¶16

The petitioner, thus, prays that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to;

¶17

(i) Admit and allow the present writ application;

¶18

(ii) Hold/order/direct that the order dated 16.01.2026 passed by Opposite Party No.4 and non-implementation/non-execution of order dated 17.07.2026 of Opposite Party No.3 by Opposite Party No.4 was/is bad, illegal, arbitrary and nonest in eye of law and thereby direct the Opposite Party No.4 to record the Plot No. 182/1371 & 184, measuring an area Ac. 0.68 dec. and Ac. 0.16 dec. of Khata No. 301/103, Mouza-Manuri, Sabika Plot No. 81, Khata No. 103, MouzaManjuri in favour of the petitioner forthwith;

¶19

(iii) Pass such other order/orders as deem fit and proper for the interest of justice;

¶20

And for which act of kindness, the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.”

¶21

1 | P a g e

¶22

In course of hearing, Mr. A.N. Das, learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner draws attention of this Court to the direction of the Sub-Collector, Jajpur in order dated 17.07.2026, whereby the Tahasildar, Vyasanagar was directed to take necessary action for execution of the order dated 02.09.2025 passed in Mutation Appeal No. 38 of 2024. Mr. Das, learned Senior Counsel, submits that despite such decree passed by the civil Court, the Tahasildar has not acted upon the same even till date.

¶23

Mr. G.Mohanty, learned Standing Counsel fairly submits that the civil Court as well as the superior authority having passed appropriate orders, it is obligatory on the part of the Tahasildar to carry out the same.

¶24

This Court has time and again held that in view of the mandate of Rule 35 of the OSS Rules, the Tahasildar has no option but to carry out the orders of the superior Courts. The writ application is therefore, disposed of by directing the Tahasildar, Vyasanagar to act upon the direction of the appellate authority as referred above as early as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order by the petitioner.

¶25

Urgent certified copy be granted on proper application.

¶26

( Sashikanta Mishra) Judge

¶27

Deepak

¶28

Signature Not Verified

¶29

Digitally Signed Signed by: DEEPAK PARIDA Reason: Authentication Location: OHC,Cuttack Date: 11-Sep-2026 17:30:24

¶30

2 | P a g e

Chandranath Banerjee v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandranath Banerjee v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases