Nihali Sethy @ Neheli Sethy Vs Collector, Nayagarh

“It is therefore, prayed that let this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit the writ petition issue notice to the Opposite Party and call for the LCR of Mutation Case No.1969 of 2022 and after hearing the counsel for the parties allow the writ petition by setting aside the order dated 26.08.2024;

¶15

Further be pleased to direct the Tahasildar, Ranpur Opposite Party No.3 to issue ROR in favour of the petitioners;

¶16

And any other or further order(s) may kindly be passed which will serve the best interest of justice;

¶17

And for which act of kindness the petitioners shall as duty bound shall ever pray and belief.”

¶18

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and on going through the order sheet of the mutation case in question, this Court finds that on 17.08.2022 the Revenue Inspector passed the following order:-

¶19

“This case is put up today for hearing after the stipulated objection period is over. Individual notices have been duly served and General notice has been duly published in the locality and SR back. No objection has been received from any quarter during the stipulated period. The applicant is personally present. He submitted the order sheet of the

¶20

Page 1 of 2

¶21

Court of the Commissioner, Consolidation and Settlement Odisha, Bhubaneswar. As the case record related to Court of the Commissioner, Consolidation and Settlement Odisha, Bhubaneswar. Hence, the case is contested in nature. Sent the case record to the Tahasildar, Ranpur for taking further action.”

¶22

On the next date however, i.e., on 26.08.2024 the applicants being absent, the Tahasildar rejected the case.

¶23

Mr. Dasmohapatra, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his client never received any notice and being rustic villagers they were not aware of the next date of posting of the case and hence, they could not appear. It is further submitted that since the report of the R.I. is in their favour, the Tahasildar ought to have taken the same into consideration without rejecting the case on the technical ground of non-appearance.

¶24

Considering the submissions, the writ application is disposed of by setting aside the order dated 26.08.2024 and by directing the Tahasildar, Ranpur to re-hear the Mutation Case No.1969 of 2022 after hearing the petitioners and taking note of all available materials including the report of the R.I., which is already on record.

¶25

For convenience, the petitioners are directed to appear before the Tahasildar on 23^rd March, 2026 for fixing further date of hearing. The mutation case shall be disposed of within four weeks from the date of appearance.

¶26

(Sashikanta Mishra)

¶27

Judge

¶28

Signature Not Verified

¶29

Digitally Signed Signed by: PUSPANJALI GHADAI Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Puspanjali Date: 10-Mar-2026 11:58:34

¶30

Page 2 of 2

Nihali Sethy @ Neheli Sethy v. Collector, Nayagarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nihali Sethy @ Neheli Sethy v. Collector, Nayagarh

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

Sarat Kumar Rath Vs State of Odisha

Gayatri Nanda Vs State of Odisha

Gayatri Nanda Vs State of Odisha

Rakesh Kumar Patro Vs State of Odisha

Sangita Sahu Vs State of Odisha

Akshaya Kumar Das Vs State of Odisha