Orissa High Court
Ganesh Kumar Mahakud vs State Of Odisha & Others ........... ... on 18 August, 2025
ORISSA HIGH COURT : CUTTACK
WP(C) No.8798 of 2025
Applications under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of
India.
***
Ganesh Kumar Mahakud ................. Petitioner
-VERSUS-
State of Odisha & Others ........... Opposite Parties
WP(C) No.20458 of 2025
Saroj Kumar Mahakud and another ........... Petitioner
-VERSUS-
State of Odisha & Others ........... Opposite Parties
Counsel appeared for the parties:
For the Petitioners : Mr. U.K.Samal, Advocate
For the Opposite Parties : Ms. J.Sahoo, ASC
P R E S E N T:
HONOURABLE
MR. JUSTICE ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA
Date of Hearing: 18.08.2025 :: Date of Judgment : 18.08.2025
J UDGMENT
ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA, J.--
When, in both the writ petitions, the final
order dated 12.02.1999 passed in Revenue Appeal
Case No.8 of 1998 by the learned Sub-Collector,
Anandapur is under challenge, then, both the writ
petitions are taken up together analogously for
their final disposal through this common
judgment.
1. I have already heard from the learned counsel for the
Petitioners of both the writ petitions and the learned ASC for the
State in both the writ petitions.
2. An order was passed on dated 27.01.1994 by the
Tahasildar, Anandapur in Revenue Misc. Case No.176 of 1993 for
recording the case land in the name of six persons i.e. the
Petitioner in writ petition No.8798 of 2025, the Petitioners in the
writ petition No.20458 of 2025 along with three others.
3. The learned Additional Tahasildar, Anandapur challenged
the said order dated 27.01.1994 passed in Revenue Misc. Case
No.176 of 1993 by the Tahasildar, Anandapur preferring Revenue
Appeal Case No.8 of 1998 before the learned Sub-Collector,
Anandapur impleading only to the Petitioner in W.P.(C) No.8798
of 2025 without impleading the other five persons in whose
favour order was also passed by the Tahasildar, Anandapur for
recording the case land.
4. The Sub-Collector, Anandapur disposed of the Revenue
Appeal Case No.8 of 1998 finally on dated 12.02.1999 in setting
aside the order dated 27.01.1994 passed in Revenue Misc. Case
No.176 of 1993 by the Tahasildar, Anandapur without impleading
all the six persons, in whose favour order dated 27.01.1994 in
Revenue Misc. Case No.176 of 1993 was passed by the
Tahasildar, Anandapur and without taking into account to the
objection of the Petitioner in W.P.(C) No.8798 of 2025 about the
same concerning the non-impleadment of other five beneficiaries
of the order dated 27.01.1994 passed in Revenue Misc. Case
No.176 of 1993 by the Tahasildar, Anandapur.
5. It is very fundamental in law that, if any order of any Court
or authority is challenged before its Appellate Court or authority,
the persons, those were the Parties before the lower Court, the
said persons must be the Parties before the Appellate Court or
Appellate Authority.
On this aspect, the propositions of law has already been
clarified in the ratio of the following decision of the Apex Court:-
In a case between District Collector, Srikakulam and
others vrs. Bhagathi Krishana Rao and others :
reported in 2010 (2) CLR (S.C.)-98 in Para No.3 that,
all the Parties in the lower Court must be impleaded
as Party before the Appellate Court in an appeal.
6. So, by applying the above principles of law, the impugned
order passed by the Appellate Court in Revenue Appeal Case No.8
of 1998 by the Sub-Collector, Anandapur (O.P. No.4) cannot be
sustainable under law for non-impleadment of the necessary
Parties in that appeal i.e. all the beneficiaries of the order dated
27.01.1994 passed in Revenue Misc. Case No.176 of 1993 by the
Tahasildar, Anandapur.
7. Therefore, both the writ petitions filed by the Petitioner are
allowed.
8. The impugned order dated 12.02.1999 passed in Revenue
Appeal Case No.8 of 1998 by the learned Sub-Collector,
Anandapur is quashed.
9. The matter vide Revenue Appeal Case No.8 of 1998 is
remitted back to the Sub-Collector, Anandapur to decide the
same afresh as per law impleading all the persons, in whose
favour, the order was passed in Revenue Misc. Case No.176 of
1993 by the Tahasildar, Anandapur and to dispose of the said
Revenue Appeal Case No.8 of 1998 as per law as expeditiously as
possible within a period of three months from the date of
communication of this order after giving opportunity of being
heard to all the Parties as per the directions made above in full
compliance of the principles of natural justice.
10. Registry is directed to communicate the copy of this
judgment immediately to the Sub-Collector, Anandapur (O.P.
No.4).
11. As such, both the writ petitions filed by the Petitioners are
disposed of finally.
(ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA)
JUDGE
Signature High
NotCourt of Orissa, Cuttack
Verified
18.08.2025// Binayak Sahoo
Digitally Signed Jr. Stenographer
Signed by: BINAYAK SAHOO
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 19-Aug-2025 15:43:33
