Orissa High Court
Bhimasen Sahu vs State Of Odisha And Others .... Opposite ... on 2 September, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
(In these matters of applications under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India)
W.P.(C) No.21872 of 2025
Bhimasen Sahu .... Petitioner
-versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opposite Parties
W.P.(C) No.21874 of 2025
Dr. B.Tulasi Das @ Batula Tulasi .... Petitioner
Das
-versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opposite Parties
W.P.(C) No.21907 of 2025
A. Vijay Shankar @ Anasul Vijay .... Petitioner
Bhaskar
-versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opposite Parties
Appeared in all the Writ Petitions:-
For all the Petitioners : Mr. A.P. Mishra, Adv.
For all the Opposite Parties : Mr. S.Nayak, ASC
(for the State-Opp. Parties
CORAM:
JUSTICE A.C. BEHERA
JUDGMENT
Date of hearing : 02.09.2025 / date of judgment : 02.09.2025
A.C. Behera, J. Since, the proceedings in the meeting of the District
Level Valuation Committee (DLVC), Ganjam at Chatrapur
dated 27.01.2022 (Annexure-3) concerning the fixation of
Bench Mark Valuation for the year 2024-2026 is under
challenge in these three writ petitions, then all the above writ
petitions are taken up together analogously for their final
disposal through this common Judgment.
2. The Petitioners have filed these writ petitions praying for
quashing the Annexure-3 (District Level Valuation Committee)
on the ground that, the same is not in accordance with law.
3. I have already heard from the learned counsel for the
Petitioners and the learned Additional Standing Counsel for
the Opposite Parties.
4. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the
Petitioners submitted that, when the District Level Valuation
Committee (DLVC), Ganjam as per its resolution dated
27.01.2022 vide Annexure-3 has enhanced the Bench Mark
Valuation of the immovable properties in different areas of
Ganjam District under different Sub-Divisions and Tahasils to
the exorbitant percentages much more than 100 per cent
without application of the minds of the members of the DLVC,
and without following the due procedures of law, the same is
liable to be quashed.
To which, the learned Additional Standing Counsel
objected contending that, Annexure-3 has been prepared by
the members of the District Level Valuation Committee (DLVC),
Ganjam as per law, for which, the same is not liable to be
quashed.
5. Rule 37 of The Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952 provides about the
constitution of District Level Committee and Sub-District (Tahasil Level)
Valuation Committee and also about its Chairman and Members.
As per the said Rule 37 of The Odisha Stamp Rules,
1952, the Chairman of the District Level Valuation Committee
(DLVC) is Collector. The Chairman-cum-Collector of the DLVC
shall nominate two public persons, as the nominees and one of
the nominees of the Chairman be preferably an expert valuer or
an expert familiar with principles and practices of valuation of
land, buildings and other immovable properties and the tenure
of such nominated members shall be two years.
Rule 37-A of the said Rules provides that, the District
Valuation Committee may utilize the services of professional life
chartered values for assisting in revision of market value
guideline.
Rules 38 and 39 of The Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952 provide
about functions to be performed by the District Valuation
Committee and Sub-District Valuation Committee.
Rule 40 of The Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952 provides that, the
market value guidelines prepared under the chapter shall be
issued as soon as they are prepared and shall thereafter be
revised biennially from the 1st April. But, in case, the Committee
fails to revise the valuation, the Collector as Chairman would
enhance the value by ten per cent (10%) of the value so fixed.
Rule 41 of The Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952 provides about
the procedure for preparation of set of market value. As per
Rule 41, while working out the values of immovable properties,
the respective Committee shall take into account the principle
of valuation mentioned in clause (a) of Rule 39 and Appendix II
and such other instructions issued by the Government and
Inspector General of Registration from time to time.
Rule 41-A of The Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952 provides that,
notwithstanding contained anything in these rules under this
chapter, the State Government may engage reputed
professional agency to examine the procedure for fixation of
market value guideline regarding proper value of the properties
in any particular area or areas under such terms and
conditions as considered proper for being taken into
consideration by the Committee for such area/areas.
Rule 42 of the Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952 provides that, the
sale statistics of the property for urban area and rural area
shall be prepared in form Nos.5 and 6 respectively and shall be
submitted by the Registering Officer to the Sub-District
Valuation Committee.
The engineering department shall prepare the sale statistics of
the properties in form No.7 and submit the same to the District
Committee as well as Sub-District Committee.
As per Rule 43 of the said Rules, set of market value of the
property shall be made available to each Registering Officer
by the convenor of the District Valuation Committee.
As per Rule 44 of the said Rules, notwithstanding
anything contained in these rules, the Chairman of the District
Committee may order for a special revision of (Set of market
value of the properties) in any specified area under his
jurisdiction in the following circumstances leading to sudden
changes of property value for the following reasons:-
(a) Setting up of an industry or group of industries or
infrastructure projects;
(b) Development of large scale housing projects;
(c) Any other special circumstances having an
impact on the values of immovable property in any
specified area.
Rule 45 of the Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952 provides that,
the Committee after serving of the notices on the public, public
officers, if they think fit to do so, record the statement of the
persons and for the purpose of enquiry:
(a) May call for any information or record from any
public office or officers or Authority under the
State/Central Government or any local authority or
statutory authority.
(b) May record statement from any Member of the
public office or authority as mentioned under Clause
(a);
(c) May call the parties to be present on the date
specified in the notice and on such other date as may
be fixed by it.
Rule 46 of the said Rules provides that, if any
representation is received from parties aggrieved by the rates
shown in the (Set of market value of the properties) or if any
officer of the department notices anomaly, the same shall be
referred to the Committee by the Chairman for final decision.
Rule 47 of the said Rules provides that, it shall be
within the competency of Inspector-General of Registration to
issue such administrative instructions of general nature as
may be required from time to time for the effective
implementation of the rules under the said Chapter VI.
6. The provisions of law envisaged in Rules 40 and 41 of The
Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952 provide that,
"The District Level Valuation Committee constituted
according to Rule 37 shall fix the Bench Mark Valuation
revising the same biennially before elapsing two years of the
fixation of previous valuation. Because, the valuation fixed by
the valuation committee shall ordinarily continue for two
years, unless there is special revision of the same by the
Chairman of District valuation committee i.e. Collector to
enhance the same for any of the circumstances envisaged in
Rule 44. But, if for any reason, the District Level Valuation
Committee (DLVC) fails to revise the Bench Mark Valuation
for next two years, the Collector-cum-Chairman of the DLVC
can enhance ten per cent on the Bench Mark Valuation of
previous two years fixed by the DLVC."
7. Therefore, the provisions of law envisaged in the Rules 40
and 41 of The Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952 do not provide any
power to the District Level Valuation Committee (DLVC) for
enhancement of the Bench Mark Valuation by way of
percentage like the Collector-cum-Chairman of the District
Valuation Committee, because, the DLVC can only fix the
Bench Mark Valuation through its revision as per law.
8. So, the provisions of law envisaged in Rule 40 and 41
provide for the revision of the Bench Mark Valuation by the
DLVC for next two years by fixing the same, but, not through
enhancement by way of percentage like the Collector.
9. Here, in these matters at hand, as per Annexure-3, the
District Level Valuation Committee (DLVC) constituted by the
Opposite Parties has enhanced the Bench Mark Valuation of
the immovable properties of different Sub-Divisions and
Tahasils of Ganjam District by way of percentage without
fixing the specific valuation in area wise through revision for
the next two years.
That apart, Annexure-3 of DLVC does not reveal about
the compliance of the provisions of clause (x) and (a-i) of Rule
37 of The Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952 regarding the inclusion of
the nominees into the committee of the DLVC by the
Chairman-cum-Collector taking one an expert valuer or an
expert familar with the principle and practices of valuation of
land and buildings and other immovable properties to the said
DLVC.
10. On this aspect, the propositions of law has already been
clarified in the ratio of the following decisions:-
(i) In a case between Guruprasad Mohanty and
another Vrs. State of Odisha & Others reported in AIR
2009 (Orissa) 172 (D.B.) in Para 18 that,
the DLVC while fixing market value guidelines shall
take into consideration all the criteria as prescribed in
Appendix-II of The Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952.
As it reveals the Bench Mark Valuation was fixed
by the Committee in the year 2006, the Committee had
not fixed another Bench Mark Valuation for the year 2008
and it was only enhanced, as prescribed under Rule 40(2)
of The Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952, which is not
inconformity with law. Because, As per Rule 40(2) of The
Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952, if the District Valuation
Committee fails to revise the Bench Mark Valuation after
expiry of two years period, the Collector can enhance the
value by 10 per cent on the value fixed earlier by the
DLVC.
So, the District Valuation Committee has no power
to enhance the value by way of percentage, but, only the
Collector has power to enhance 10 per cent of the value
on the value for the previous two years on failure of the
District Valuation Committee for fixing another Bench
Mark Valuation for next two years.
Therefore, the enhancement of the Bench Mark
Valuation by the Committee was not made in accordance
with the statutory provisions. For which, the same is
quashed and directed to appropriate authorities to take
step for fixation of the valuation of the land taking into
account to the Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952.
(ii) In a case between Capital Bar Association,
Bhubaneswar Vrs. State of Orissa & two Others and
Hrudananda Mangaraj and another Vrs.
Commissioner-cum-Secretary, R & DM Department,
Odisha and three others reported in 2013 (I) OLR 344
that,
Rule 37 of the Odisha Stamp Rules, 1952 provides
that, two public persons are to be nominated by the
Chairman to the District Valuation Committee and as per
the note to the said rule, one of the nominees between the
said two persons be preferably an expert valuer or an
expert familiar with principles and practices of valuation
of land, building and other immovable properties.
When, it is found that, Rule 37 of the Odisha
Stamp Rules, 1952 has not been complied with for the
Constitution of the District Valuation Committee, for
which, the resolution passed by the District Valuation
Committee without complying the provisions of rule 37
thereof cannot be sustainable under law. Therefore, the
impugned notification dated 31.08.2012 is hereby
quashed and the matter was remitted back to the District
Level Valuation Committee (DLVC), Khordha for fresh
consideration of the said matter in accordance with law
and to complete the entire process of fixing revised Bench
Mark Valuation as early as possible, preferably within a
period of three months from the date of said judgment.
11. Here, in these matters at hand, when, the Annexure-3
(which is impugned in these writ petitions) do not reveal about
the fixation of Bench Mark Valuation through revision for the
year 2024-2026 revising the same by the DLVC as per rules
through properly constituted committee of the DLVC
inconformity with the Rule 37 of the Odisha Stamp Rules,
1952 and when instead of fixing Bench Mark Valuation in
Annexure-3, there is enhancement on the earlier Bench Mark
Valuation in area wise by way of percentage and when,
provisions of law do not empower the DLVC for enhancement
of the Bench Mark Valuation by way of percentage, but, only
empower the DLVC for fixing the Bench Mark Valuation
through revision for the next two years and when, only
Collector-cum-Chairman of the DLVC is empowered under law
to enhance 10 per cent on the previously fixed Bench Mark
Valuation, in case of the failure of the DLVC to fix another
Bench Mark Valuation through revision and when, the said 10
per cent enhancement made by the Collector-cum-Chairman of
the DLVC shall remain in force till the fixation of another
Bench Mark Valuation through revision by the DLVC and
when, Annexure-3 prepared by the DLVC does not reveal about
the application of the minds of the members of the DLVC, as
no proper reason has been assigned in that Annexure-3
regarding the cause of unanimous views of the Members of the
DLVC for enhancement of the Bench Mark Valuation, then at
this juncture, by applying the principles of law enunciated in
the ratio of the aforesaid Division Bench decision of this Court
to these matters at hand, it is held that, the enhancement of
the Bench Mark Valuation as per Annexure-3 made by the
DLVC, Ganjam is not in accordance with the provisions of law
for the reasons assigned above.
12. It is the law that, where a statute provides for a particular
procedure to be followed for doing a particular Act in a
particular manner, the authority has to follow the same
procedures and passing of anything beyond the statutory
procedures is not permissible under law.
13. The law has already been settled that, a writ petition
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950 is
maintainable for enforcing statutory or legal right, when there
is complain by the Petitioner that, there is a breach of the
statutory duty on the part of the public functionaries like these
matters at hand, in that case, the writ jurisdiction can be
resorted to compelling the public functionaries like the
Opposite Parties for the performance of the statutory duties in
accordance with law through a direction in the form of writ of
Mandamus.
14. As per the discussions and observations made above,
when it is held that, the impugned Annexure-3 concerning the
enhancement of the Bench Mark Valuation in respect of the
immovable properties of different villages/areas under different
Sub-Divisions and Tahasils in the District of Ganjam has been
made by the Opposite Parties without following the statutory
provisions of law, then at this juncture, by applying the
principles of law enunciated in the ratio of the decisions
indicated in Para No.10 of this judgment, the Annexures 3
(prepared by the DLVC) is liable to be quashed.
15. Therefore, there are merits in these writ petitions filed by
the Petitioners. The same must succeed.
16. In result, all the writ petitions filed by the Petitioners are
allowed.
17. The impugned Annexures 3 prepared by the DLVC is
quashed.
18. The Opposite Parties are directed to follow the guidelines
and directions given by this Court in the judgments dated
22.08.2025 passed in W.P.(C) No.1831 of 2025 analogously on
that date with its connected similar matters.
19. As such, all these three writ petitions are disposed of
finally.
(A.C. Behera),
Judge
Orissa High Court, Cuttack
2 nd Of September, 2025/ Binayak Sahoo//
Junior Stenographer
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
