Orissa High Court
Padma Manjari Devi vs State Of Odisha & Others ........... ... on 17 April, 2025
ORISSA HIGH COURT : CUTTACK
WP(C) No.15461 of 2023
An application under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of
India.
***
Padma Manjari Devi ............. Petitioners
& Others
-VERSUS-
State of Odisha & Others ........... Opposite Parties
Counsel appeared for the parties:
For the Petitioners : Mr. B.Bhuyan,Sr.Advocate.
Ms.S.Sahoo,Advocate
For the Opposite Parties : Mr. G.Mohanty, S.C. (for O.P. Nos.1 to 3)
Mr.K.Choudhury,Advocate
Mr.L.K.Maharana,Advocate
Mr.A.N.Bhattacharya,Advocate
(for the O.P. No.4)
WP(C) No.15462 of 2023
Padma Manjari Devi ............. Petitioners
& Others
-VERSUS-
State of Odisha & Others ........... Opposite Parties
Counsel appeared for the parties:
For the Petitioners : Mr. B.Bhuyan,Sr.Advocate.
Ms.S.Sahoo,Advocate
For the Opposite Parties :
P R E S E N T:
HONOURABLE
MR. JUSTICE ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA
Date of Hearing: 02.04.2025 :: Date of Judgment : 17.04.2025
J UDGMENT
ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA, J.--
1. Since both these writ petitions have arisen out of one order
vide Order dated 11.04.2023 (Annexure 7) passed in Misc. Case
No.30 of 2023 by the Tahasildar, Baripada (O.P. No.3) and since,
the same petitioners have filed both the writ petitions, then, both
the writ petitions have been taken up together analogously for
their final disposal through this common Judgment.
2. The factual backgrounds of both the writ petitions, which
prompted the petitioners for filing of the same are that, on the
basis of the final decree passed in the suit vide C.S. No.366 of
2022, two applications for mutation of the case land vide
Mutation case Nos.529 of 2023 and 530 of 2023 were filed by the
petitioners before the Tahasildar, Baripada (O.P. No.3) and the
Tahasildar, Baripada (O.P. No.3) allowed the above two mutation
cases of the petitioners on dated 14.03.2023 and on the basis of
the said order dated 14.03.2023 passed by the O.P. No.3, two
new Khatas were prepared vide Khata No.154/683 in Mouja
Swarupvilla and Khata No.67/49 in Mouja Tadkisole in the name
of the petitioners.
Subsequent thereto, on the basis of an order dated
11.04.2023 (Annexure 7) passed in Misc. Case No.30 of 2023
filed by the O.P. No.4 (Prativa Manjari Devi), the Tahasildar,
Baripada (O.P. No.3) cancelled the said newly created R.o.Rs. vide
Khata Nos.154/683 and 67/49 (those were prepared in the name
of the petitioners after mutation) without issuing any notice to
the petitioners and without giving any opportunity of being heard
to the petitioners.
For which, after knowing about such order of cancellation of
their R.o.Rs. vide Khata Nos. 154/683 and 67/49 as per order
dated 11.04.2023 (Annexure 7) passed in Misc. Case No.30 of
2023 by the Tahasildar, Baripada (O.P. No.3), they (petitioners)
challenged the same by filing these two writ petitions against the
O.Ps praying for quashing the said order dated 11.04.2023
(Annexure 7) passed in Misc. Case No.30 of 2023 by the
Tahasildar, Baripada (O.P. No.3).
3. I have already heard from the learned counsels of both the
sides.
4. On the basis of the rival submissions of the learned
counsels of both the sides, the crux of these writ petitions is that,
"whether the impugned order dated 11.04.2023
(Annexure 7) passed in Misc. Case No.30 of 2023 by
the Tahasildar, Baripada (O.P. No.3) and
cancellation/correction of the R.o.Rs vide Khata
Nos.154/683 and 67/49 from the name of the
petitioners to the name of O.P. No.4 is sustainable
under law?
5. It is the undisputed case of the parties that, prior to
cancellation of the R.o.Rs vide Khata Nos.154/683 and 67/49,
the said R.o.Rs were in the name of the petitioners and the said
R.o.Rs were prepared on the basis of the final order dated
14.03.2023 passed in Mutation case Nos.529 of 2023 and 530 of
2023 as per the final decree passed in C.S. No.366 of 2023 in
favour of the petitioners, but, the said R.o.Rs vide Khata Nos.
154/683 and 67/49 (those were prepared in the name of the
petitioners) have been cancelled/corrected from the name of the
petitioners to the name of the O.P. No.4 without issuing any
notice to the petitioners and without giving any opportunity of
being heard to the petitioners, which is evident from the
impugned order dated 11.04.2023 (Annexure 7) passed in Misc.
Case No.30 of 2023 by the Tahasildar, Baripada (O.P. No.3).
6. It is the settled propositions of law that, if in any case or in
any matter, an order is passed to the detriment of the interest of
any party, the said party must be given a reasonable opportunity
to show-cause before passing of that order, for no other reason,
but, only in order to comply the principles of natural justice.
7. On this aspect, the propositions of law has already been
clarified by the Hon'ble Courts and Apex Court in the ratio of the
following decisions:-
(i) In a case between Banambar Das Vrs. Pitambar Das
& Others reported in 2010 (1) OLR 700 that, whenever an
order is passed to the detriment of a party, that party must
be given a reasonable opportunity to show-cause and being
heard.
(ii) In a case between Satyajit Sahoo Vrs. State of
Orissa & Others reported in 2016 (1) OLR 325 that, if a
decision is rendered, which affects a party, it would amount
to clear violation of the principles of natural justice and an
order passed in violation of salutary provision of natural
justice would be a nullity.
(iii) In a case between Johra & Others Vrs. State of
Haryana & Others reported in 2019 (1) CCC (S.C.) 12 that,
no order can be passed by any Court in any judicial
proceedings against any party to such proceedings without
hearing and giving such party an opportunity of hearing.
8. Here in this matter at hand, when, the impugned order
dated 11.04.2023 (Annexure 7) has been passed by the
Tahasildar, Baripada (O.P. No.3) in Misc. Case No.30 of 2023
cancelling the R.o.R vide Khata Nos.154/683 and 67/49 from the
name of the petitioners to the name of the O.P. No.4 affecting the
interest of the petitioners without giving any opportunity to the
petitioners for filing show-cause and without giving any
opportunity of being heard to the petitioners, then at this
juncture, by applying the principles of law enunciated in the ratio
of the above decisions of the Hon'ble courts and Apex Court, it is
held that, the impugned order dated 11.04.2023 (Annexure 7)
passed in Misc. Case No.30 of 2023 by the Tahasildar, Baripada
(O.P. No.3) is a nullity, as the same has been passed in
contravention with the principles of natural justice.
For which, the impugned order dated 11.04.2023 (Annexure
7) passed in Misc. Case No.30 of 2023 by the Tahasildar,
Baripada (O.P. No.3) cannot be sustainable under law. So, the
impugned order (Annexure 7) is liable to be quashed (set aside).
9. Therefore, there is merit in the writ petitions filed by the
petitioners. The same must succeed.
10. In result, these writ petitions filed by the petitioners are
allowed.
11. The impugned order dated 11.04.2023 (Annexure 7) passed
in Misc. Case No.30 of 2023 passed by the Tahasildar, Baripada
(O.P. No.3) is quashed (set aside).
12. Accordingly, both the writ petitions filed by the petitioners
are disposed of finally.
(ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA)
JUDGE
High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
17.04.2025// Binayak Sahoo
Jr. Stenographer
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
