Salmi Tirkey Vs the Addl. Sub-Collector, Panposh, Rourkela — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Salmi Tirkey Vs the Addl. Sub-Collector, Panposh, Rourkela — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition allowed; impugned order dated 10.11.2022 (Annexure-4) set aside; matter remitted to the Sub-Collector, Panposh to hear Revenue Appeal Case No.42 of 2021 afresh after granting the appellants opportunity to substitute the deceased respondents, thereafter to proceed in accordance with law.

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned order dated 10.11.2022 passed by Opposite Party No.1 under Annexure-4 (together with the consequential Annexure-5 notice in Mutation Case No.425 of 2017) should be abated and quashed, the order having been passed against dead persons.

Court's answer

The Court below had expressly recorded in paragraph 5 of the impugned order the deaths of two respondents (Manga Oram and Mangru Oram), and death certificates had been produced; notwithstanding, it proceeded and disposed of the matter on merits.

Ratio / Principle

Any order passed against a dead person is a nullity.

Key takeaways

On that view, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside.ratio¶21
The matter is remitted to the Sub-Collector, Panposh to hear Revenue Appeal Case No.42 of 2021 afresh after granting the appellants an opportunity to substitute the deceased respondents, and thereafter to proceed in accordance with law.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition allowed - Impugned order dated 10.11.2022 passed by the Additional Sub-Collector, Panposh (Opposite Party No.1) under Annexure-4 in Revenue Appeal Case No.42 of 2021 set aside as a nullity - Paragraph 5 of the impugned order had expressly recorded the deaths of two respondents, Manga Oram and Mangru Oram, with death certificates produced, yet the Court below disposed of the matter on merits - Held: any order passed against a dead person is a nullity - Matter remitted to the Sub-Collector, Panposh to hear Revenue Appeal Case No.42 of 2021 afresh after granting the appellants opportunity to substitute the deceased respondents and thereafter to proceed in accordance with law - Bench: Sashikanta Mishra, J. - Decided 15.07.2026.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.40258 of 2023

Salmi Tirkey & Others

.… Petitioners Represented by Mr. B.P. Dhal, Advocate

-Versus-

The Additional Sub-Collector, Panposh, Rourkela & Others

.… Opp. Parties Represented by Mr. A.R. Dash,

Additional Government Advocate Mr. D.K. Pradhan, Advocate (For O.P. No.3)

CORAM: JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA

ORDER

15.07.2026

Order No. 09.

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

The petitioners have approached this Court with following

prayer:-

“It is therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit the writ application, issue rule NISI call for the records from the Court below and issue notice to the Opposite Parties as to why impugned order dated 10.11.2022 passed by the Opposite Party No.1 under Annexure-4 being abated against the petitioners since its inception and resultantly notice issued in Mutation Case No.425 of 2017 to one of the deal legal heir of the recorded tenant under Annexure-5 to the writ application shall not be quashed and on their failure to show case or showing insufficient cause, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to allow the present writ application and may further be pleased to pass such other or further order(s)/direction(s) and issue appropriate writ as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper considering the present facts and circumstances of the case.

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

In course of hearing, it is brought to notice of this Court that the impugned order has been passed against dead persons. Mr. Dhal, learned counsel for the petitioner draws attention of this

Page 1 of 2

Court to the observation under paragraph 5 of the impugned order wherein the fact of death of two respondents namely, Manga Oram and Mangru Oram has been explicitly mentioned. Death certificates also appear to have been produced before the Court. In spite of recording such facts, the Court below proceeded and disposed of the matter on merits.

It goes without saying that any order passed against a dead person is a nullity.

In such view of the matter, the Writ Petition is allowed. The impugned order is set aside. The matter is remitted to the SubCollector, Panposh to hear the Revenue Appeal Case No.42 of 2021 afresh after granting opportunity to the appellants to substitute the deceased respondents and thereafter, proceed in accordance with law.

(Sashikanta Mishra) Judge

Puspanjali

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed Signed by: PUSPANJALI GHADAI Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 15-Jul-2026 17:47:13

Page 2 of 2