[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Sarita Swain vs Tahasildar on 11 December, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.1050 of 2025
(An application under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950)
Sarita Swain .... Petitioner
-versus-
Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar and .... Opposite Parties
another
Appeared in this case by Hybrid Arrangement
(Virtual/Physical Mode):
For Petitioner - Mr. S. Mishra,
Advocate.
For Opposite Parties- Mr. S. Nayak,
Addl. Sanding Counsel
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.C.BEHERA
Date of Hearing :11.12.2025 :: Date of Judgment :11.12.2025
A.C. Behera, J. This writ petition under Articles 226 & 227 of
the Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the petitioner praying for
quashing (setting aside) the impugned order dated 03.12.2024 (Annexure-
2) passed in Mutation Case No.22886 of 2024 by the Addl. Tahasildar,
Bhubaneswar.
2. The factual backgrounds of this writ petition, which prompted the
petitioner for filing the same is that, as per the final order dated
07.11.2024
(Annexure-1) passed in O.S.S. Case No.642 of 2018 by the
Member, Board of Revenue, Odisha, Cuttack (O.P. No.2), direction was
given by the O.P. No.2 to the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar (O.P. No.1) for
correction of the record of the case land to the name of the petitioner
under 'Sthitiban' status reflecting the kisam of the same as 'Gharabari' in
place of 'Talia'.
Thereafter, in compliance to the direction given by the O.P. No.2 in
its above order dated 07.11.2024 passed in O.S.S. Case No.642 of 2018,
the Addl. Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar initiated a mutation case vide
Mutation Case No.22886 of 2024 and in the first hour on dated
03.12.2024, he (Addl. Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar) allowed that Mutation
Case No.22886 of 2024, but in the 2nd hour, he (Addl. Tahasildar,
Bhubaneswar) recalled that order and kept the record and status of the
case land as it was prior to its correction.
For which, without getting any way, the petitioner challenged the
said order of Addl. Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar filing this writ petition
praying for quashing the same.
3. I have already heard from the learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned ASC for the State.
4. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for
directing the Tahasildar/Addl. Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar for the
implementation of the order of the O.P. No.2.
5. The law relating to the maintainability of the like nature writ
petition for directing the Tahasildar like O.P. No.1 for the implementation
of his higher authority like O.P. No.2 has already been clarified by the
Apex Court in the ratio of the decision between Jayamma & Ors. Vrs.
Deputy Commissioner, Hassan Dist., Hassan & Ors. reported in III
(2013) CLT 94 (SC) that,
"if Subordinate Authority of the Government does not act in
terms of the directions or instructions issued by superior
authority, then in such a situation, it is not for the High Court
to compel the Subordinate Authority of the Government to
comply the instructions or directions issued by the Superior
Authority. Because, High Court is not the executing forum of
instructions issued by the Superior Authority of the
Government to its Subordinate Officer. So, as per law, it is
the duty of the Superior Authority of the Government (who
passed the order) to see the implementation of his/her own
order properly."
6. So, by applying the principles of law enunciated in the ratio of the
above decision of the Apex Court to this matter at hand, it is felt proper to
dispose of this writ petition finally giving liberty to the petitioner to
approach the Member, Board of Revenue, Odisha, Cuttack (O.P. No.2) by
filing an application annexing the certified copy of this Judgment for
implementation of its final order dated 07.11.2024 passed in O.S.S. Case
No.642 of 2018 by the said O.P. No.2 (Member, Board of Revenue,
Odisha, Cuttack) and in case of non-response to such application by the
O.P. No.2, the petitioner is at liberty to approach this Court seeking
appropriate relief for the non-response to the same by the O.P. No.2.
7. As such, this writ petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of
finally.
(A.C. Behera),
Judge.
Orissa High Court, Cuttack.
11.12.2025//Utkalika Nayak//
Junior Stenographer
Signature Not
Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: UTKALIKA
NAYAK
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of
Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 12-Dec-2025
10:54:57
