Nirupama Champati v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC23 Apr 2026WP(C)/4777/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Odisha High Court writ petition disposed; mutation appeal order revisable by Board of Revenue under Section 32 of OSS Act; impugned order under Rule 42 of OSS Rules, 1962 and paragraph-92 of mutation manual 1962; liberty to prefer revision within three weeks before appropriate revisional authority; reliance on this Court's earlier decision in Asutosh Mohapatra & others vs. Sk. Manwar Alli & Others, W.P.(C) No. 24461 of 2026 & batch; petitioner Nirupama Champati; respondents State of Odisha & another.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioner to prefer revision within three weeks before the appropriate revisional authority; if such revision is preferred, it shall be considered in accordance with law. ¶¶12

Nirupama Champati Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to the petitioner to prefer revision within three weeks before the appropriate revisional authority; if such revision is preferred, it shall be considered in accordance with law.

¶¶12

Issue for consideration

Whether redress against the impugned order (passed under Rule 42 of OSS Rules, 1962 read with paragraph-92 of the mutation manual 1962) lies through revision before the appropriate revisional authority, given this Court's earlier holding that orders passed in mutation appeal can be revised by the Board of Revenue under Section 32 of OSS Act, rather than through the present writ petition.

¶¶11

Court's answer

In view of this Court's earlier holding in Asutosh Mohapatra & others vs. Sk. Manwar Alli & Others [W.P.(C) No. 24461 of 2026 & batch] that an order passed in mutation appeal can be revised by the Board of Revenue under Section 32 of OSS Act, the writ petition is disposed of, granting the petitioner liberty to prefer revision within three weeks before the appropriate revisional authority.

¶¶12

Key takeaways

Any revision so preferred shall be considered in accordance with law by the revisional authority.obiter¶¶14
The Court observed that the impugned order was passed under Rule 42 of OSS Rules, 1962 read with paragraph-92 of the mutation manual 1962.obiter¶¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

W.P.(C) No. 4777 of 2026 (Orissa High Court, Cuttack; Justice Sashikanta Mishra; order dated 23.04.2026) - Nirupama Champati v. State of Odisha & another. Observing that the impugned order had been passed under Rule 42 of OSS Rules, 1962 read with paragraph-92 of the mutation manual 1962, and relying on this Court's earlier holding in Asutosh Mohapatra & others vs. Sk. Manwar Alli & Others [W.P.(C) No. 24461 of 2026 & batch] that an order passed in mutation appeal can be revised by the Board of Revenue under Section 32 of OSS Act, the Court disposed of the writ petition, granting the petitioner liberty to prefer revision within three weeks before the appropriate revisional authority; if such revision is preferred, it shall be considered in accordance with law.

Nirupama Champati v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nirupama Champati 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Aswini Kumar Patel Vs State of Odisha

Golbadan Podh Vs Addl.Commissioner,Consolidation and Settlement,Sambalpur

Shayam Sundar Lakhua @ Shayam Sundar Lakhua Samasi Vs State of Orissa

Sukanta Biswal Vs State of Odisha

Sandesh Kumar Raul Vs the State of Odisha

Mir Tafik Vs Inspector General of Registration, Odisha Cuttack