Petitioner challenged registration refusal for selling homestead land. Court noted exemption under Section 73(C) and followed coordinate bench direction to consider usability via Tahasildar opinion.
Directed matter be considered by appropriate authority for registration eligibility based on land usability.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.29310 of 2026
CNR No.ODHC010699242026
Jasobanti Oram
…. Petitioner Mr. P.K. Nayak, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and Others
…. Opp. Parties
Ms. A. Dash, ASC
CORAM:
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH
ORDER
Order No.
11.09.2026
of the proposed land, the same was placed before the Registering Authority. The Registering Authority declined to entertain the document of the Petitioner for registration on the ground that the land in question belong to the Scheduled Tribe Community, and the same cannot be transacted without the written permission of the Sub-Collector, Sadar, Sambalpur, according to Section 22 of the OLR Act.
“18. In the result this court disposes of all the writ petitions granting liberty to each Petitioner to approach the competent Revenue Authority, i.e. concerned Tahasildar to give his opinion on the usability of the land and in such event the concerned Tahasildar is directed to give his opinion in respect of each specific land of respective Petitioners regarding its usability for agricultural purpose any more in the present scenario, within a period of 60 days from the date of application. Depending upon the opinion of the Revenue Authority, the Petitioners are at liberty to approach the registering officer again.”
Page 2 of 3
(Chittaranjan Dash)
Judge
AK Pradhan
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed Signed by: ANANTA KUMAR PRADHAN Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA Date: 12-Sep-2026 13:41:11
Page 3 of 3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the homestead land situated in the urban area is exempt from Section 22 of the OLR Act requiring Sub-Collector permission.
Whether the coordinate bench's direction on revenue authority opinion can be followed by the current court pending government challenge.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Hemanta Naik & Others v. State of Odisha & OthersRelied on¶18
Hemanta Naik & Others v. State of Odisha & Others
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Jasobanti Oram
State of Odisha
Chittaranjan Dash
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
