WP(C)/6338/2021
2021 Latest Caselaw 4746 Ori

                               W.P.(C) No.6338 of 2021




03.   07.04.2021         This matter is taken up by video conferencing
                   mode.
                   2.    Heard Mrs. Sujata Jena, learned counsel for the
                   petitioner and Mr. Dillip Kumar Mishra, learned
                   Additional Government Advocate for the State-opposite
                   parties.
                   3.    The grievance of the petitioner in this writ
                   petition is with regard to inaction of the Tahasildar,
                   Marshaghai      in   accepting   the     mutation    petition
                   intended to be filed by the petitioner.
                   4.    Mrs. Jena, learned counsel for the petitioner
                   submits that the petitioner claims title over the suit
                   land on the basis of the judgment dated 22.07.2002
                   passed     by   learned     Additional    District   Judge,
                   Kendrapara in T.A. No.23 of 1993. It is her submission
                   that the said judgment and decree is still in vogue and
                   has not been set aside or varied by any competent
                   court of law. In spite of the same, the Tahasildar,
                   Marshaghai is not accepting the mutation petition to
                   mutate the land in the name of the petitioner.
                   5.    Taking into consideration the submission made
                   by Mrs. Jena, learned counsel for the petitioner, this
                   Court vide order dated 05.03.2021 directed learned
                   State Counsel to take instruction in the matter.
                   6.    Today,     Mr.      Mishra,      learned   Additional
                   Government Advocate for the State submits that he
                   has not received any instruction and prays for some
                   more time for the same.
                                   2



     7.    Taking into consideration the nature of dispute
     involved in this writ petition, this Court feels that
     interest of justice will be best served, if the Tahasildar,
     Marshaghai       accepts    the   mutation    petition   and
     proceeds with the matter in accordance with law.
     8.    This Court, accordingly, without expressing any
     opinion on the merits of the case, disposes of the writ
     petition with a direction that in the event the petitioner
     files an application under Rule 34 of the Orissa Survey
     & Settlement Rules, 1962 complete in all respect along
     with an authenticated copy of this order downloaded
     from the website of the Orissa High Court, the
     Tahasildar, Marshaghai-opposite party no.2 shall do
     well to accept the same and proceed with the matter in
     accordance with law.
     8.1   As   the    restrictions    due   to   the   COVID-19
     situation are continuing, learned counsel for the
     parties may utilize a soft copy of this order available in
     the High Court's website or print out thereof at par
     with certified copy in the manner prescribed, vide
     Court's Notice No.4587, dated 25th March, 2020.


                                ................................
                                K.R. MOHAPATRA,J.

jm