Orissa High Court
Siba Prasad @ Mahesh Kumar Parida vs State Of Odisha And Others ....... ... on 4 December, 2023
Author: B.P. Routray
Bench: B.P. Routray
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
Signed by: CHITTA RANJAN BISWAL
Reason: Authentication
Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack
Date: 07-Dec-2023 15:55:58
WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No. 24759 OF 2023
(An application under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India)
Siba Prasad @ Mahesh Kumar Parida
and another ...... Petitioners
Versus
State of Odisha and others ....... Opposite Parties
Advocate(s) appeared in this case:-
For Petitioners : Mr.N.K.Sahu, Advocate
For Opposite Parties : Mr.U.K.Sahoo,
Additional Standing Counsel
CORAM : JUSTICE B.P. ROUTRAY
JUDGMENT
4th December, 2023
B.P. Routray, J.
1. Heard Mr.N.K.Sahu, learned counsel for the Petitioners and
Mr.U.K.Sahoo, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State-
Opposite Parties.
2. The grievance of the Petitioners is that, after the decree passed by
the learned Civil Court, he approached the Joint Commissioner,
Signed by: CHITTA RANJAN Consolidation
BISWAL and Settlement, Sambalpur and the Joint Commissioner in
Reason: Authentication
Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack
Date: 07-Dec-2023 15:55:58order dated 27th June 2007, under Annexure-5, directed the original
Court i.e. the Tahasildar, for correction of R.O.R. based on the Civil
Court decree.
3. Then the Petitioners approached the Tahasildar. The same was
registered as Mutation Case No.723 of 2018 and the Tahasildar treating
the same as a regular mutation application rejected it in a mechanical
manner.
4. As seen from the order-sheet of the Tahasildar in Mutation Case
No.723 of 2018, the case was posted to 14th December 2018 on 11th
December 2018. But on 14th December 2018 no order was passed and
all of a sudden on 1st November 2021, the record was taken up and the
case was rejected with the following orders:
"This Case is put up today. Concerned R.I. has submitted the case record
is contested in nature. Even after repeated notices issue to the party to
appear the court for hearing but the petitioner as well as O.P. are unable
to present therefore the original documents for verification and field
possession of the applicant over the case land is not confirmed. Hence
the instant case is rejected at this level. Informed the petitioner is
accordingly."
5. It needs to be mentioned here that Rule 34 of the Odisha Survey
and Settlement Rules, 1962 read with proviso to Rule 35 prescribes that
the cases registered based on the orders of a decree of Civil Court are to
be treated as special cases. Further, this Court in Sanatan Acharya vs-
Signed by: CHITTA RANJAN Tahasildar,
BISWAL Panposh, 2016 (II) OLR 290 have observed that Rule 35 of
Reason: Authentication
Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack
Date: 07-Dec-2023 15:55:58the O.S.S. Rules provides that the Tahasildar is to carry out the order of
superior court with regard to entry in the R.O.R. and he has no authority
to sit over the order of the higher court.
6. In the instant case, the decree passed in Tittle Suit No.46 of 1998
is never disputed. The Petitioners have applied for correction of R.O.R.
in the light of the decree passed in Title Suit No.46 of 1998. Therefore,
the provisions contained in Rule 34 read with the proviso to Rule 35 of
the Odisha Survey and Settlement Rules, 1962 are squarely fitted to the
instant case and as such, the rejection of mutation case by the Tahasildar
is found erroneous. The same is accordingly set aside and the matter is
remitted back to the Tahasildar for fresh decision.
7. In the result, the appeal is disposed of with a direction to the
Tahasildar, Lathikata, Sundargarh, Opposite Party No.3 to dispose of the
Mutation Case No.732 of 2018 on merits in terms of the observation
stated above within a period of four months from the date of production
of certified copy of this order.
(B.P.Routray)
Judge
C.R.Biswal, Secy.
