[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Menaka Mishra vs State Of Odisha And Another ....... ... on 6 February, 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.32960 of 2025
(In the matter of an application under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India)
Menaka Mishra ....... Petitioner
-Versus-
State of Odisha and another ....... Opposite Parties
Advocate for the parties
For Petitioner : Mr. M. Balakrishan Rao,
Advocate
For Opposite Parties : Mr. M.K. Dash,
Addl. Standing Counsel
----------------------------
CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date of Hearing & Judgment: 06.02.2026
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
S.K. Mishra, J.
1. Heard Mr. Rao, learned Counsel for the
Petitioner so also Mr. Dash, learned ASC, who accepts
notice on behalf of the Opposite Parties and admits to have
received copy of the writ petition.
2. An innocuous prayer has been made in the writ
petition to direct the Tahasildar, Kaniha (Opposite Party
No.2) to dispose of Mutation Case No.284 of 2021 within a
specified period. Hence, on consent of learned Counsel for
the parties, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and
disposal at the stage of admission.
3. As is revealed from the pleadings made in the
writ petition, the present Petitioner, based on a judgment
and decree passed in C.S. No.20 of 2006 dated 16.01.2009
passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Talcher,
filed Mutation Case No.355 of 2009 for correction of RoR.
Because of inaction of the concerned Tahasildar, W.P.(C)
No.18802 of 2010 was preferred by the Petitioner before
this Court, wherein a direction was given to dispose of
Mutation Case No.355 of 2009 expeditiously by end of
June, 2011. However, the Tahasildar did not act in terms of
said order passed in W.P.(C) No.18802 of 2010. Because of
bifurcation of Tahasils, the Petitioner preferred a fresh
Mutation Case, which was registered as Mutation Case
No.284 of 2021 before the present Opposite Party No.2
(Tahasildar, Kaniha). Because of inaction of the Opposite
Party No.2 to dispose of the said mutation case, the
Petitioner approached this Court in W.P.(C) No.5466 of
2023 which was disposed of vide order dated 10.03.2023,
directing the Tahasildar, Kanhia (Opposite Party No.2) to
dispose of the said mutation case, if pending, in accordance
with law within a period of two months from the date of
communication of the said order. Though the said order
was communicated to the Opposite Party No.2 on
14.05.2023, which was duly acknowledged by the Head
Clerk, Tahasil Office, Kaniha on 16.05.2023 (Annexure-3),
till date the said mutation case is allegedly pending for
disposal.
4. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, drawing
attention of this Court to the legal opinion given by the
Government Pleader, Angul dated 05.10.2023, as at
Annexure-4 submits, pursuant to direction of this Court in
W.P.(C) No.5466 of 2023, an opinion was sought for by the
Tahasildar, Kaniha from the Government Pleader, Angul
who opined to correct the RoR. The Petitioner was hopeful
that the Tahasildar, Kaniha shall do the needful, as advised
by the Government Pleader, Angul. Accordingly, the
Petitioner did not prefer any contempt proceeding for willful
flouting of order dated 10.03.2023 passed in W.P.(C)
No.5466 of 2023. Thereafter, since the Tahasildar, Kaniha
did not do the needful, being remediless, now the
Petitioner has preferred the present writ petition seeking for
a direction to the Opposite Parties to record the name of the
Petitioner in the suit land measuring an Ac.028 decimals,
resting with Khata No.121 and Plot No.345 in the Revenue
Village-Dumuduma coming under Angul District in terms of
the judgment and decree passed in C.S. No.20 of 2006.
5. Learned Counsel for the State submits, despite
direction of this Court so also opinion of learned
Government Pleader, Angul, though the alleged inaction of
the Opposite Party No.2-Tahasildar, Kaniha to correct the
RoR, as prayed vide Mutation Case No.284 of 2021, seems
to be correct, but the reason for such inaction is yet to be
ascertained. He further submits, with the self-same prayer
as made in W.P.(C) No.5466 of 2023, the writ petition is not
maintainable.
6. Admittedly, the reason to prefer the present writ
petition has been duly explained by the learned Counsel for
the Petitioner. After knowing about the opinion of the
Government Pleader, Angul dated 05.10.2023, the
Petitioner was hopeful that the Tahasildar, Kaniha shall do
the needful and hence, no contempt proceeding was
initiated within the period of limitation for willful flouting of
the order dated 10.03.2023 passed in W.P.(C) No.5466 of
2023 . Further, there is an allegation that the said order is
yet to be worked out despite opinion of the learned
Government Pleader, Angul.
7. At this stage, it would be apt to extract below the
opinion of the Government Pleader, Angul dated
05.10.2023, as at Annexure-4.
"Letter No.215/GP Dt.05.10.2023
To
The Tahasildar, Kaniha
Sub: Regarding opinion in Civil Suit No.20 of 2006.
Ref: Your Letter No.2675 Dt.21.08.2021
Sir,
I have gone through the details of Civil Suit
no.20/2006. One Menaka Mishra file the suit as
against the Tahasildar, Talcher & Collector, Angul.
After due hearing on contest the then Government
Pleader/Collector & Tahasildar though appear but
not filed any written statement and also not
contested the case. The Hon'ble Court has decreed
the suit in favour of the plaintiff and in the original
decree the plaintiff means, Menaka Mishra's right
title interest over the suit land is declared on
dtd.25.08.2011. Though in my letter to
Tahasildar, Talcher to file an appeal as
against the order by the help of AGP, Talcher;
the Tahasilder has not filed any appeal as
against the decree and already 14 years
passed and there is no bonafied reason why the
appeal is not filed.
In such circumstances when the matter is
communicated by Tahasildar, Kaniha to the
undersigned it is against verified & come to a
conclusion that the Government should obey the
order of the Ho'ble Civil Court and act accordingely
as per the provisions of law; that is correct of ROR
under Survey & Settlement Act in favour of Menaka
Mishra wife of Prahallad Mishra taking the
importance of the Civil Court order just to avoid any
further litigation initiated by said applicant.
This is for your kind information and necessary
Act.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Government Pleader,
Angul"
(Emphasis supplied)
8. In view of such opinion and facts detailed above,
this Court is of the view that such a technical plea of
maintainability of the writ petition should not stand on the
way of this Court to give a direction to the Tahasildar,
Kaniha (Opposite Party No.2) to do the needful for early
disposal of Mutation Case No.284 of 2021, which is
allegedly pending till date.
9. At this stage, Mr. Rao, learned Counsel for the
Petitioner files the Notification dated 3rd June, 2020 of the
General Administration & Public Grievance (AR)
Department and submits, as per the said notification,
which was made in exercising the powers conferred by
Section 3 read with Sections 5 and 6 of the Odisha Right to
Public Services Act, 2012 (Odisha Act, 8 of 2012), an
uncontested mutation case has to be disposed of within a
period of 90 days from the date of filing of such an
application. But, in the present case, the said mutation
case is pending since 2021. The said notification dated 3rd
June, 2020 filed in the Court be kept on record.
10. After going through the said Opinion of the
Government Pleader, Angul dated 05.10.2023 so also
Notification dated 3rd June, 2020, this Court is of prima
facie view that there is no legal impediment to dispose of
Mutation Case No.284 of 2021 and it comes under the
category of uncontested mutation case and is required to be
disposed of in terms of the said Notification dated 3rd June,
2020 (supra) within 90 days of presentation of such
application for mutation.
11. Hence, it is directed that the Tahasildar, Kaniha
shall do well to deal with and dispose of the Mutation Case
No.284 of 2021 in accordance with law within eight weeks
from the date of production of certified copy of this
judgment, provided there is no legal impediments.
12. It is made clear that if it is found by the
Tahasildar, Kaniha that there is any legal impediment to
dispose of Mutation Case No.284 of 2021, as directed, the
same should be brought to the notice of this Court
immediately within two weeks from the date of production
of certified copy of this order seeking
clarification/modification of this order.
13. It is made further clear that if the Tahasildar,
Kaniha fails to act, as observed above, a suo motu
contempt proceeding shall be initiated against the present
Tahasildar, Kaniha for willful flouting of this order.
14. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.
No order as to costs.
15. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as
per rules.
...............................
S.K. MISHRA, J.
Orissa High Court, Cuttack.
Dated, the 6th February, 2026/Kanhu
Designation: Junior Stenographer
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack.
Date: 09-Feb-2026 19:22:53
