Orissa High Court

*** vs Collector on 31 October, 2025

                 ORISSA HIGH COURT : CUTTACK




                   WP(C) No.21191 of 2023

An application under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of
                            India.



                             ***

Abhimanyu Behera

... Petitioner.

-VERSUS-

Collector, Jajpur & Others

... Opposite Parties.

Counsel appeared for the parties:

For the Petitioner : Mr. Sukanta Kumar Nayak-2, Advocate For the Opposite Parties : Mr. G. Mohanty, Standing Counsel.

(For the State)

P R E S E N T:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA

Date of Hearing : 14.10.2025 :: Date of Judgment : 31.10.2025

J UDGMENT

ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA, J.--

1. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the

Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the petitioner

praying for quashing the impugned order dated 08.06.2023

(Annexure-4) passed in O.S.S. Revision Case No.02 of 2022 by

the Collector, Jajpur (Opp. Party No.1).

2. The factual backgrounds of this writ petition, which

prompted the petitioner for filing of the same is that, the final

R.o.R of the case land vide Khata No.507 plot No.1521/6181

Ac.0.170 decimals in Mouza-Banpur under Jajpur P.S. was

published by the Settlement Authorities under "Sthitiban"

status in the name of the petitioner in the year 2015.

Seven years after the final publication of the said R.o.R,

the Tahasildar, Jajpur (Opp. Party No.2) filed a revision before

the Collector, Jajpur (Opp. Party No.1) vide O.S.S. Revision

Case No.02 of 2022 under Rule 42-A of the OS&S Rules, 1962

praying for cancellation of the R.o.R from the name of the

petitioner to the name of the State/Government, to which, the

petitioner being the Opp. Party in that OSS Revision Case

No.02 of 2022 objected on the ground that, the Collector has

no power, authority or jurisdiction under law to cancel the

finally published R.o.R of the case land by the Settlement

Authorities in the name of the petitioner through the said

Revision filed by the Tahasildar, Jajpur (Opp. Party No.2)

under Rule 42-A of the OS&S Rules, 1962, because, such

revision vide OSS Revision Case No.02 of 2022 before the

Collector, Jajpur (Opp. Party No.1) is not entertainable under

law.

After hearing, the Collector, Jajpur (Opp. Party No.1)

passed the impugned order on dated 08.06.2023 (Annexure-4)

in that O.S.S. Revision Case No.02 of 2022, for cancellation

and correction of the finally published R.o.R of the case land

from the name of the petitioner to the name of the

Government with a direction to record the case land under

"Abada Jogya Anabadi Khata" of the Government assigning

the reasons that,

"the case land was the Government land under "Anabadi Khata" of the Government, but the same was recorded in the name of the

petitioner adopting fraud and overlooking the interest of the Government and sent copy of the said order to the Tahasildar, Jajpur (Opp. Party No.2) for correction of the R.o.R of the case land from the name of the petitioner to the name of the Government."

3. On being aggrieved with the said impugned order dated

08.06.2023 (Annexure-4) passed by the Collector, Jajpur

(Opp. Party No.1) in O.S.S. Revision Case No.02 of 2022 under

Rule 42-A of the OS&S Rules, 1962, the petitioner challenged

the same by filing this writ petition praying for quashing (set

aside) that impugned order dated 08.06.2023 (Annexure-4)

passed in O.S.S. Revision Case No.02 of 2022 by the Collector,

Jajpur (Opp. Party No.1) on the ground that, seven years after

the final publication of the R.o.R of the case land by the

Settlement authorities in the name of the petitioner, the

Collector, Jajpur (Opp. Party No.1) had no power, authority or

jurisdiction under law to entertain the revision vide OSS

Revision Case No.02 of 2022 filed by the Tahasildar, Jajpur

(Opp. Party No.2) for cancellation of the finally published

R.o.R of the case land from the name of the petitioner to the

name of the Government.

4. I have already heard from the learned counsel for the

petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the State.

5. As per the rival submissions of the learned counsels of

both the sides, the crux of this writ petition is that,

"Whether 7 years after the final publication of the R.o.R of the case land, the revision filed by the Tahasildar, Jajpur (Opp. Party No.2) before the Collector, Jajpur (Opp. Party No.1) under Rule 42-A of the OS&S Rules, 1962 for cancellation and correction of the said R.o.R was entertainable under law?"

6. On this aspect, the propositions of law has already been

clarified by this Court in the ratio of the following decision:

I. In a case between Sri Pravakar Swain & Others Vs. Tahasildar, Aul & Another reported in 2012 (Supp.II) OLR 466 that, if any party is aggrieved about any erroneous entry in the finally published R.o.R. for the cause of action arose prior to the publication of the R.o.R, the appropriate legal remedy for the same has been provided under Sections 15,25 & 42 of the OS & S Act, 1958.

Aggrieved party has the option of filing a revision petition before the Board of Revenue under Section 15(b) of the OSS Act, 1958 within one year of publication of R.o.R or filing a Civil Suit under Section 42 of the OS&S Act 1958 within three challenging the finally published R.o.R. (para No.7)

7. Here in this matter at hand, the R.o.R of the case land

was finally published by the Settlement Authorities in the year

2015 as per OS&S Act, 1958 and OS&S Rules 1962 under

"Sthitiban" status in the name of the petitioner.

If the Tahasildar, Jajpur (Opp. Party No.2) was aggrieved

against the preparation of the final R.o.R of the case land in

the name of the petitioner, then, according to the propositions

of law enunciated in the ratio of the above decision, the Opp.

Party No.2 (Tahasildar, Jajpur) could have filed a Revision

Petition under Section 15(b) of the OS&S Act, 1958 before the

Board of Revenue or could have filed a Civil Suit challenging

the said finally published R.o.R of the case land, but the Opp.