Disposed¶21

Dibakar Sa v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC5 Jan 2026WP(C)/37360/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition maintainability — selfsame prayer already considered in earlier writ petition (W.P.(C) No.29883 of 2025) and detailed order of Collector, Sundargarh in Misc. Case No.86 of 2025 — notice of environment clearance dated 17.12.2025 — Ghogarpalli Coal Mine Project — Vedanta Ltd. — Orissa State Pollution Control Board — liberty to file fresh writ petition — disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the Petitioners to prefer a fresh Writ Petition challenging the order passed in Misc. Case No.86 of 2025; no relief on the challenge to the environment clearance notice, the writ petition being held not maintainable. ¶21

Dibakar Sa Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.37360 of 2025

¶3

Dibakar Sa & Ors.

¶4

…. Petitioner(s) Mr. Byomokesh Sahoo, Adv.

¶5

-versus-

¶6

…. State of Orissa & Ors. Opposite Party(s) Mr. Millan Kumar, CGC Mr. Rajdeep Pradhan, ASC Mr. Satya Smruti Mohanty, Adv.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI

¶9

Order ORDER No. 05.01.2026

¶10

¶11

1 . This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.

¶12

2 . In filing this Writ Petition, the Petitioners being the inhabitants of Sundargarh district, have challenged the notice of environment clearance dated 17.12.2025 issued in respect of the Ghogarpalli Coal Mine Project in favour of the Vedanta Ltd. by the Orissa State Pollution Control Board.

¶13

3 . Heard.

¶14

Signature Not Verified

¶15

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Or issa Date: 05-Jan-2026 18:33:14

¶16

4 . At the outset, learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.8/ M/s. Vedanta Ltd. Submits that on the selfsame issue the Petitioner had earlier preferred a Writ Petition vide W.P.(C) No.29883 of 2025 before this Court which was disposed of vide order dated 10.11.2025 with a direction

¶17

Page 1 of 2

¶18

for consideration of the representation at the instance of the Petitioner.

¶19

5 . It is further submitted that pursuant to the said order dated 10.11.2025 the Collector, Sundargarh has passed a detailed order dated 11.12.2025 in Misc. Case No.86 of 2025. He, in the process, prays for dismissal of this Writ Petition.

¶20

6 . Considering the above submission and since the representation at the instance of the Petitioner on the selfsame issue has already been considered pursuant to the earlier order passed in the above noted Writ Petition and a detailed order on the issue involved in this matter has already been passed in the above noted Misc. Case, this Court is of the view that this Writ Petition is not maintainable as the Petitioner has preferred this Writ Petition with the selfsame prayer as has already been made in the above noted Writ Petition. However, considering the request of learned counsel for the Petitioner, this Court makes it clear that if the Petitioners so desire, they may prefer a fresh Writ Petition challenging the order passed in the above noted Misc. Case.

¶21

7 . This Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of.

¶22

Signature Not Verified

¶23

(Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi)

¶24

Judge

¶25

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court Ayaskanta of Or issa Date: 05-Jan-2026 18:33:14

¶26

Page 2 of 2

Dibakar Sa v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dibakar Sa 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

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Srinibas Nanda Vs Union of India

Biswanath Maharana Vs Union of India

Junu Begum Vs Union of India

Susanta Mallick Vs State of Odisha

Raghab Chandra Giri Vs State of Odisha

Rabindra Nath Mohanty Vs State of Odisha