[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Prasan Kumar Jena vs State Of Odisha & Others on 29 November, 2025
ORISSA HIGH COURT : CUTTACK
WP(C) No.33061 of 2025
An application under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of
India.
***
Prasan Kumar Jena
... Petitioner.
-VERSUS-
State of Odisha & Others
... Opposite Parties.
Counsel appeared for the parties:
For the Petitioner : Mr. P.K. Mishra, Advocate
For the Opposite Parties : Mr. T. Kumar, Addl. Standing Counsel.
(State Opp. Parties)
P R E S E N T:
HONOURABLE
MR. JUSTICE ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA
Date of Hearing : 29.11.2025 :: Date of Judgment :29.11.2025
J UDGMENT
ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA, J.--
1. This writ petition under Article 226 & 227 of the
Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the petitioner
praying for quashing the final order dated 02.06.2025 passed
in Mutation Case No.26166 of 2024 by the Addl. Tahasildar,
Bhubaneswar (Opp. Party No.6) on the ground that, his
Mutation Case No.26166 of 2024 has been rejected by the
Opp. Party No.6 as per the impugned order dated 02.06.2025
(Annexure-7) without giving any opportunity of hearing to him
(petitioner).
2. Heard from the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State-Opp. Parties.
3. In order to have a clarity in this matter, the impugned
order passed by the Addl. Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar (Opp.
Party No.6) on dated 02.06.2025 (Annexure-7) as well as its
previous order dated 13.01.2025 in Mutation Case No.26166
of 2024 are depicted hereunder:
13/01/2025
"ISSUE NOTICE TO THE PARTIES CONCERNED TO
PRESENT BEFORE THE UNDERSIGNED FOR
VERIFICATION OF DOCUMENTS."
Priyanka Nahak
Addl. Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar.
02/06/2025
"This Case is taken up today. The applicant is not present
on the date of hearing. Hence, the relevant documents
related to this case could not be verified to establish the
flow of title from the RT to proposed RT after giving
reasonable opportunities for hearing. Therefore, this case is
rejected"
Priyanka Nahak
Addl. Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar.
4. It appears from the order dated 13.01.2025 passed in
Mutation Case No.26166 of 2024, the next date thereof was
not fixed, but surprisingly, the record of Mutation Case
No.26166 of 2024 was put up on dated 02.06.2025 and the
impugned order for rejection was passed by the Opp. Party
No.6 on the ground of absence of the petitioner as well as for
non-filing of documents by him (petitioner).
So, due to non-fixing of the Mutation Case No.26166 of
2024 from 13.01.2025 to 02.06.2025 by the Opp. Party No.6,
there was no scope or opportunity for the petitioner to know
that, his mutation case shall be taken up by the Opp. Party
No.6 on 02.06.2025. For which, the absence of the petitioner
on 02.06.2025 before the Opp. Party No.6 was obvious and
natural.
5. As such, the impugned order in Mutation Case No.26166
of 2024 has been passed on dated 02.06.2025 by the Opp.
Party No.6 violating the principles of natural justice.
On this aspect, the propositions of law has already been
clarified in the ratio of the following decisions:
I. In a case between High Court Bar Association, Allahabad
Vrs. State of U.P. & Others reported in 2025 (1) Civ.L.J.
(SC) 40 (Para No.16) that, any order passed without
complying the principles of natural justice is to be treated as
illegal.
II. In a case between Shivaji vrs. Parwatibai and others reported
in 2025(2) Civil Law Judgment(S.C.)-528 that, when a case is
disposed of against any party without giving him/her an
opportunity of hearing, such disposal deserves to be deprecated
in view of 2023 SCC online S.C.-1210 between Suresh
Lataruji Ramteke vrs. Sau.Sumanbai Pandurang Petkar and
others, for which, matter is required to be remitted back for its
decision afresh.
6. Therefore, there is justification under law for making
interference with the impugned order passed on dated
02.06.2025 (Annexure-7) in Mutation Case No.26166 of 2024
by the Addl. Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar (Opp. Party No.6)
through this writ petition filed by the petitioner.
7. As such there is merit in the writ petition filed by the
petitioner. The same must succeed.
8. In result, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is
allowed on contest.
The impugned order dated 02.06.2025 (Annexure-7)
passed in Mutation Case No.26166 of 2024 by the Addl.
Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar (Opp. Party No.6) is quashed.
The matter vide Mutation Case No.26166 of 2024 is
remitted back to the Addl. Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar (Opp.
Party No.6) to decide the same afresh after giving opportunity
of being heard to the petitioner and others, if any within a
period of two months from the date of filing of the certified
copy of this Judgment by the petitioner before the Opp. Party
No.3.
9. The petitioner is directed to appear before the Addl.
Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar (Opp. Party No.6) in Mutation Case
No.26166 of 2024 on dated 11.12.2025 and to file the certified
copy of this Judgment for the purpose of receiving the
directions of the Addl. Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar (Opp. Party
No.6) as to further proceeding of the Mutation Case No.26166
of 2024.
10. As such, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is
disposed of finally.
(ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA)
JUDGE
High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
The 29 .11. 2025// Rati Ranjan Nayak
Sr. Stenographer
