Ratna Roy vs Sub-Collector And Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 1177 Ori

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                             W.P.(C) No.2849 OF 2023


            Ratna Roy                              ....          Petitioner(s)
                                                         Mr.S.K.Nayak,Adv.
                                        -versus-

            Sub-Collector and ors.                 ....        Opposite Party(s)

                                                         Mr.U.K.Sahoo,ASC
                      CORAM:
                      JUSTICE BISWANATH RATH
                                      ORDER

Order No.                            03.02.2023
   01.       1.     Heard learned counsel for the Parties.

2. This Writ Petition involves rejection of the Mutation

Application at the instance of the Petitioner based on a Civil Court

decree at Annexure-1 and confirmation of the same by the Appellate

Authority vide Annexures-2 and 4 respectively.

3. Taking this Court to the Civil Court decree at Annexure-1, Mr.

Nayak, learned counsel submits, once there is Civil Court decree

declaring right, title and interest of the parties, the Revenue Authority

has no other go than to accept the same. It is in the circumstance

taking this Court to both orders and observations therein, Mr. Nayak

submitted that there has been mechanical disposal of the proceedings

involved herein.

// 2 //

4. Mr. Sahoo, learned counsel for the State however drawing

attention of this Court, the notification of the Government not to do

away with the record involving the Bebandobasta property submits

that the Revenue Authority is also to be guided by the notification

with regard to preparation of R.O.R. in particular circumstance. In the

above situation, Mr. Sahoo, learned counsel for the State claims, there

is no infirmity in the impugned orders, there is however no dispute

that the decree in Civil suit will not always remain binding on the

Revenue Authority also.

5. Considering rival contentions of the Parties, this Court from

perusal of the order involved herein finds, there has been production

of the Civil Court decree before both the Authorites. For the settled

position of law that Mutation Authorities are bound by Civil Court

judgment and decree, this Court finds, there has been no lawful

disposal of both the proceedings. This Court however observes, if the

State is aggrieved by the Civil Court judgment and decree, there is

different procedure required to be followed but in no circumstance,

the Tahasildar can sit over such judgment and decree so long as it is

maintained in declining of the Mutation Application, against the

person benefitted by the Civil Court decree.

// 3 //

6. In the circumstance, as the Civil Court judgment and decree is

binding on the Revenue Authorities, this Court interferes with the

both the orders and remits the matter back to the Tahasildar, Cuttack

Sadar-O.P. 3 for re-disposal of the Mutation Case No. 1335 of 2020.

Petitioner may bring the copy of order of this Court to the notice of

O.P. No.-3 for his further proceeding in the matter.

7. Free copy of this order be handed over to the learned State

Counsel.

(Biswanath Rath) Judge

U.Nayak