Orissa High Court
Manoranjan Rout And Others vs Tahasildar on 13 November, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.16562 of 2024
(An application under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950)
Manoranjan Rout and Others .... Petitioners
-versus-
Tahasildar, Rajanagar and Others .... Opposite Parties
Appeared in this case by Hybrid Arrangement
(Virtual/Physical Mode):
For Petitioners - Ms. S. Mishra,
Advocate.
For Opposite Parties- Mr. P.K. Biswal,
Advocate.
Mr. S. Nayak,
Addl. Standing Counsel
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.C.BEHERA
Date of Hearing :13.11.2025 :: Date of Judgment :13.11.2025
A.C. Behera, J. This writ petition under Articles 226 & 227 of
the Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the petitioners praying
for quashing the impugned order dated 07.12.2023 (Annexure-4) passed
in S.R.P. Case No.901 of 2017 under Section 15(b) of the O.S.S. Act,
1958 by the Commissioner, Consolidation, Odisha, Cuttack on the ground
of non-compliance of the principles of natural justice i.e. without
impleading the LRs of the recorded owners (whose interests are affected
by the impugned order passed in S.R.P. Case No.901 of 2017).
2. Heard from the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel
for O.P. Nos.2 and 3(a) and 3(c) and learned ASC for the State.
3. As per the submissions of the learned counsels of both the sides,
the R.o.R. of the case land under Khata No.68 in Mouza Nethuria under
Rajnagar Tahasil was published in the year 1987 in the names of Sridhar
Rout, Bhaiga Rout and Dhusasan Rout jointly. To which, O.P. Nos.2 and
3(a) to 3(c) challenged by filing a revision vide S.R.P. Case No.901 of
2017 praying for quashing the same only impleading some of the LRs of
the above deceased recorded tenants i.e. some of the LRs of Sridhar Rout,
Bhaiga Rout and Dhusasan Rout without impleading their all LRs.
The said revision vide S.R.P. Case No.901 of 2017 was allowed
and disposed of finally through the impugned order vide Annexure-4 and
direction was given for correction of the R.o.R. from the names of the
recorded tenants in the names of the LRs of Naran Swain (those are O.P.
Nos.2 and 3(a) to 3(c) in this writ petition).
As, all the LRs of the deceased Sridhar Rout, Bhaiga Rout and
Dhusasan Rout filed this writ petition praying for quashing the impugned
order dated 07.12.2023 (Annexure-4) passed in S.R.P. Case No.901 of
2017 by the Commissioner, Consolidation, Odisha, Cuttack on the ground
that, all the LRs of Sridhar Rout, Bhaiga Rout and Dhusasan Rout should
have been impleaded as parties in the revision, but they have not been
impleaded, for which, the impugned order vide Annexure-4 is in violation
of the principles of natural justice.
4. On this aspect, propositions of law has already been clarified in the
ratio of the following decision:-
In a case between Alekh Chandra Rath and another Vrs.
Commissioner of Land Records and Settlement, Orissa and Others
reported in 1989 (2) OLR 135 that,
persons whose interests are likely to be affected are not made
parties in the revision, still then, the Revision was allowed. When the
petitioners who claim title to the disputed land having not been
impleaded and when they are praying for hearing of the revision
afresh, then it would be a fit case to re-open the matter to comply with
the requirements of the principles of natural justice. For which, the
matter was remanded for fresh disposal on merit.
5. Here in this matter at hand, when, undisputedly some of LRs of the
deceased recorded tenants have not been impleaded as parties in the
revision and when undisputedly the impugned order vide Annexure-4 has
been passed without providing opportunity to all the LRs of the deceased
recorded tenants (those are the petitioners in this writ petition), then at
this juncture, in view of the propositions of law enunciated in the ratio of
the aforesaid decision, the impugned order (Annexure-4) passed by the
Commissioner, Consolidation, Odisha, Cuttack cannot be sustainable
under law. The same is liable to be quashed.
As such, there is merit in the writ petition filed by the petitioner.
The same is to be allowed in part.
6. In result, the writ petition filed by the petitioners is allowed in part
on contest.
The impugned order dated 07.12.2023 (Annexure-4) passed in
passed in S.R.P. Case No.901 of 2017 under Section 15(b) of the O.S.S.
Act, 1958 by the Commissioner, Consolidation, Odisha, Cuttack is
quashed.
The matter vide S.R.P. Case No.901 of 2017 is remitted back
(remanded back) to the Commissioner, Consolidation, Odisha, Cuttack
for deciding the same afresh as per law after impleading all the LRs of
Sridhar Rout, Bhaiga Rout and Dhusasan Rout (those are the petitioners
in this writ petition) giving opportunity of being heard to all the parties
complying the principles of natural justice as expeditiously as possible
within a period of 4 months from the date of appearance of the parties.
The parties in this writ petition are directed to appear before the
Commissioner, Consolidation, Odisha, Cuttack in S.R.P. Case No.901 of
2017 on 24.11.2025 for the purpose of receiving the directions of the
Commissioner, Consolidation, Odisha, Cuttack as to further proceedings
of the S.R.P. Case No.901 of 2017 and to file the certified copy of this
judgment
Parties are directed to keep the case land as it is in status quo
without creating third party interest till the approach of the petitioners to
the Revisional Court.
7. As such, the writ petition filed by the petitioners is disposed of
finally.
(A.C. Behera),
Judge.
Orissa High Court, Cuttack.
13.11.2025//Utkalika Nayak//
Junior Stenographer
