Orissa High Court
(An Application Under Articles 226 And ... vs Commissioner Of Endowments on 30 October, 2025
Bench: K.R. Mohapatra, Savitri Ratho
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY
Reason: Authentication
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK
Date: 07-Nov-2025 19:21:37
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No. 9234 OF 2025
(An application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India)
****
Jagannath Temple Managing
Committee, Koraput, represented through
its Secretary, Bhabani Sankar Acharya
... Petitioner
-versus-
1. Commissioner of Endowments,
Odisha, Bhubaneswar
2. Additional Assistant Commissioner of
Endowments, Berhampur,
At/PO:Berhampur, Dist:Ganjam,
3. Manoj Kumar Mishra,
S/o- Laxmikanta Mishra, At- Bhandi Sahi,
Sri Jaganath Temple Colony,
Twon/P.O/Dist-Koraput
(Appellant in the Court below) ... Opposite Parties
4. Collector-Cum-District Magistrate,
Working President of Sri Jaganath Mandir
Managing Committee, Koraput
Town/P.O/Dist-Koraput
... Proforma Opp.
(Respondent No.l in the Court below)
Party
Advocate for the parties
For Petitioner : Mr. Prasanta Kumar Nanda, Advocate
For Opp. Parties : Mr. Amit Kumar Nath, Advocate
(For Opposite Party Nos.1 and 2)
Mr. Swapna Kumar Ojha, Advocate
(For Opposite Party No.3)
CORAM:
JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Heard and disposed of on 30.10.2025
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
W.P(C). No.9234 of 2025
Page 1 of 6
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY
Reason: Authentication
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK
Date: 07-Nov-2025 19:21:37
JUDGMENT
By the Bench
1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Petitioner in this writ petition seeks to assail the judgment
dated 1st March, 2025 (Annexure-5) passed by learned Additional
Assistant Commissioner of Endowments, Berhampur in Appeal Case
No.1 of 2023 filed under Section 32 of the Odisha Hindu Religious
Endowments Act, 1951 (for brevity, 'the Act').
3. Mr. Nanda, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that
Opposite Party No.3 was a priest (Pujaka) in Shree Jagannath Temple
at Koraput. The Opposite Party No.3 used to come to the temple in a
drunken state and misbehave with the Management and created
disturbance in the premises of the temple known as 'Sabara
Srikhetra'. He also misbehaved the devotees. Hence, an enquiry was
conducted by the Managing Committee of the temple and being found
guilty, the Opposite Party No.3 was removed from rendering services
as priest vide order dated 13th March, 2023. Assailing the order of
removal passed by the Secretary of Shree Jagannath Temple
Managing Committee, Koraput, the Opposite Party No.3 preferred
Appeal under Section 32 of the Act before the Additional Assistant
Commissioner of Endowments, Berhampur, which was registered as
Appeal Case No.1 of 2023. Learned Additional Assistant
Commissioner, without verifying the records of enquiry and delving
into the veracity of the allegations made against Opposite Party No.3,
Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK
Date: 07-Nov-2025 19:21:37
held that the Opposite Party No.3 was not given any opportunity of
hearing during enquiry and directed for reinstatement of the Opposite
Party No.3 as Sebayat of Shree Jagannath Temple, Koraput.
3.1 It is his submission that discussing the case of the parties,
learned Additional Assistant Commissioner at paragraph-5, held that
no opportunity of hearing was given to Opposite Party No.3 at the
time of enquiry. Thus, in all fairness, the appellate authority could
have remanded the matter to the Managing Committee of the temple
for a de novo enquiry providing opportunity of hearing to the
Opposite Party No.3. To the contrary, learned Additional Assistant
Commissioner without discussing the materials on record more
particularly records concerning enquiry against the Opposite Party
No.3, it directed that the Opposite Party No.3 should be reinstated in
service as Sebayat. He, therefore, submits that the Additional
Assistant Commissioner, Berhampur exceeded his jurisdiction in
directing to reinstate the Opposite Party No.3 and prays for setting
aside the order under Annexure-5.
4. Mr. Ojha, learned counsel appearing for Opposite Party
No.3 submits that the allegations made against Opposite Party No.3
are vague and there is no basis of such allegations. The Secretary of
the Managing Committee of the temple in like manner removed some
other old employees. Learned Additional Assistant Commissioner, on
verification of record, more particularly record concerning enquiry
against Opposite Party No.3, came to hold that no opportunity was
Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK
Date: 07-Nov-2025 19:21:37
given to him at the time of enquiry. Thus, there is no illegality in
directing to reinstate the Opposite Party No.3.
4.1 It is further submitted that when the enquiry to remove
Opposite Party No.3 was held to be perfunctory, ordinarily the
delinquent should be reinstated in service, unless otherwise directed
for reasons to be recorded in writing. Since there is no reason
assigned as to why Opposite Party No.3 should not be reinstated in
service, there is no illegality in the impugned order. Hence, he prays
for dismissal of the writ petition.
5. Mr. Nath, learned counsel representing the Additional
Assistant Commissioner of Endowments, Berhampur submits that on
scrutiny of records, the Appellate Authority passed the impugned
order. Since it is observed that the enquiry conducted against
Opposite Party No.3 is perfunctory, there is no illegality in directing
his reinstatement. He, however, submits that he has no objection if a
fresh enquiry is conducted against Opposite Party No.3 for the alleged
misconduct.
6. Taking into consideration the submissions made by learned
counsel for the parties and on perusal of record, more particularly the
impugned order under Annexure-5, it is apparent that learned
Additional Assistant Commissioner of Endowments, Berhampur
discussing the case of parties came to a conclusion that opportunity of
hearing was not given to Opposite Party No.3 at the time of enquiry
conducted by the Managing Committee of the temple. Thus, the
enquiry conducted against the Opposite Party No.3 was held to be
Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK
Date: 07-Nov-2025 19:21:37
perfunctory. In that case, the Additional Assistant Commissioner of
Endowments, Berhampur should have remitted the matter to the
Managing Committee, which is the competent authority to make an
enquiry and take a decision on the alleged misconduct against
Opposite Party No.3. Without recording any finding on the veracity of
alleged misconduct of Opposite Party No.3, direction to reinstate the
Opposite Party No.3 in service, does not appear to be proper and
justified. In the facts and circumstances of the case, learned
Additional Assistant Commissioner should have directed to conduct
enquiry afresh from the stage it was found to be irregular or illegal.
No such finding appears to have been recorded by learned Additional
Assistant Commissioner.
7. Accordingly, this Court modifying the impugned order
under Annexure-5 remits the matter to the Managing Committee of
Shree Jagannath Temple, Koraput to conduct a de novo enquiry with
regard to misconduct as alleged against Opposite Party No.3
providing him opportunity of hearing to participate and adduce
evidence in the matter, if so advised and to conduct the enquiry
following due procedure of law.
8. Since the matter relates to termination /removal of Opposite
Party No.3, the Managing Committee of Shree Jagannath Temple,
Koraput shall do well to complete the enquiry within a period of six
months from the date of appearance of Opposite Party No.3 before
him on being noticed by the said the Managing Committee. Parties
Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK
Date: 07-Nov-2025 19:21:37
are directed to cooperate with the Managing Committee for fair and
proper enquiry.
9. With the modification, as aforesaid, in the impugned order
under Annexure-5, the Writ Petition is disposed of.
Urgent certified copy, if applied for, shall be given as per
Rules.
(K.R. Mohapatra)
Judge
(Savitri Ratho)
Judge
High Court of Orissa
Dated the 30th day of October, 2025/ s.s.satapathy
