Orissa High Court
WP(C)/38332/2020 on 8 January, 2021
W.P.(C) No. 38332 of 2020
02. 08.01.2021 Due to outbreak of COVID-19, this matter is taken
up through Video Conferencing.
Heard Mr. N.R. Routray, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. A.K. Mishra, learned Additional
Government Advocate for the State-opposite party Nos. 1 and
2.
The petitioner in this writ petition prays for a
direction to the Tahasildar, Pattamundai-opposite party No.2
to comply with the direction made in R.P. Case No. 30 of
2017 within a stipulated time.
Mr. Routray, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that he had filed a revision petition under Section
15 (b) before the Commissioner, Consolidation, Board of
Revenue, Odisha, Cuttack in R.P. No.30 of 2017. The said
revision was disposed of vide order dated 03.07.2019 with
the following direction:
"In Revision Petition No.30/2017 filed U/s
15(b) of the O.S. & S Act, 1958 (Shortly
called as the Act) relating to Vill-
Damodarpatna, PS-Pattamundai, Dist-
Kendrapara the Petitioner Tuku Kund has
prayed for correction of impugned Hal R.O.R.
and separate recording in her favour in
respect of the suit land on the basis of
purchase and possession through RSD No.654
dt.26.02.1953. Detailed particulars of land
under dispute is as per plaint of Revision
Petition dt.27.01.2017.
2.0. Considering the available documents
on record and nature of relief prayed for by
the Petitioner delay is condoned and the
Revision Petition is taken up for hearing on
merit.
2
3.0. The learned Counsel for the petitioner
and Addl. Standing Counsel (for the state) are
present and heard. Other Ops are absent on
the date of hearing. Hence, they were set ex
parte.
4.0. On verification of documents on
record it is evident that the claim of the
petitioner appears to have merit. Hence, the
Tahasildar, Pattamundai is directed to
conduct field enquiry in presence of both the
parties after verification of relevant title of
documents and pass appropriate orders on the
claim of the petitioner as per law. Resultantly,
the Revision Petition is admitted and disposed
of.
Send the copy of the judgment along with
plaint to the Tahasildar, Pattamundai within
two weeks from the date of order.
Pronounced the order in the open court today."
It is his submission that although a direction was
made to the Tahasildar, Pattamundai-opposite party No.2 to
comply with the direction within a period of two weeks from
the date of the order, the same has not yet been complied
with. Hence, this writ petition has been filed.
Mr. Mishra, learned Additional Government
Advocate for the State, on the other hand, submits that the
Commissioner could not have directed the Tahasildar,
Pattamundai-opposite party No.2 to adjudicate the rival
claim of the petitioner vis-à-vis opposite party Nos.3 and 4 in
view of decision in the case of Smt. Bijaya Chatterjee -v-
Commissioner, Land Records and Settlement, Odisha,
Cuttack, reported in 2000 (II) OLR-349, wherein it is held
that the Commissioner could have directed the Tahasildar,
Pattamundai-opposite party No.2 and make enquiry and
submit report to the said Court to take a decision in the
3
matter. After publication of the R.O.R. under Section 12-B
of the Orissa Survey Settlement Act, 1958 (for short, 'the
Act'), the Tahasildar, Pattamundai cannot exercise the power
under Rule 34 of the Orissa Survey Settlement Rules, 1962.
But on perusal of the impugned order under Annexure-1, it
appears that the Tahasildar, Puttamundai has been directed
to exercise such power. In view of the statutory provisions,
as aforesaid, the order under Annexure-1 cannot be given
effect to. Hence, he prays for the dismissal of the writ
petition.
Taking into consideration the submissions of rival
contention of the parties and the case law in the case of
Smt. Bijaya Chatterjee (supra), this Court is of the
considered view that the revisional while exercising power
under Section 15(b) of the Act can only direct the Tahasildar,
Pattamundai to make an enquiry and submit report to
facilitate the Commissioner in taking a decision in the
revision petition.
In that view of the matter, this writ petition is
disposed of with a direction to the Tahasildar, Pattamundai
to make an enquiry and submit a report to the
Commissioner after giving opportunity of hearing to the
parties, as expeditiously as possible preferably within a
period of four months and the Commissioner, Consolidation
shall take a decision in R.P. No. 30 of 2017 on merit within a
period of six months from the date of receipt of the said
report, giving opportunity of hearing to the parties
concerned.
4
With the aforesaid observation and direction, the
writ petition is disposed of.
Authenticated copy of this order downloaded
from the website of this Court shall be treated at par with
certified copy in the manner prescribed in this Court's Notice
No.4587 dated 25.03.2020.
...............................
K.R. Mohapatra,J.
bct
bct
