[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Nabin Kumar Sahu @ Sahoo vs State Of Odisha And Others .... Opp. ... on 17 February, 2026
Author: Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo
Bench: Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P. (C) No.4699 of 2026
Nabin Kumar Sahu @ Sahoo .... Petitioner
Mr. S.P. Mishra, Sr. Advocate along with
Mr. G.N. Parida, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opp. Parties
Mr. P.K. Mohanty, ASC
(for O.P. Nos.1, 2, 4 to 7)
Mr. Samir Kumar Mishra, Sr. Advocate along with
Ms. P. Mohanty, Advocate and Mr. S. Paltasingh,
Advocate
CORAM:
JUSTICE MRUGANKA SEKHAR SAHOO
ORDER
17.02.2026
(Hybrid Mode)
Order No.
02. Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and
learned Senior Counsel for Opp. Party No.3 at length.
1. It is submitted by the learned Senior Counsel, Mr.
S.P. Mishra that the principle of natural justice has not
been complied with while raising the demand therefore
the subsequent certificate proceeding is also vitiated. It is
submitted that the claim raised arises out of a
unregistered agreement and the certificate case is not
maintainable. Learned Senior Counsel refers to the
contract of clause-36, page 45 is reproduced herein for
convenience:
"Clause-36 Jurisdiction of Court:
I) In the event of any dispute covering or arising out
of this contract /agreement the jurisdiction of the
court shall be at_______ district within State of Odisha
& it is hereby expressly agreed that neither party
shall be competent to bring any case / suit in regard
to the matters covered by this agreement at any place
out side ___________district.
II) Further, it is expressly agreed & declared by &
between the parties here to that all amounts due to
the Corporation under terms of the agreement if not
paid in time be recoverable under Odisha Public
Demand Recovery Act 1962 (Odisha Act-1 of 1963) or
through Civil Court & shall bear interest at the rate of
12% per annum from the date when such payment
falls due up to the date of final recovery.
III) Besides criminal action shall also be taken
against the defaulting millers for any shortage/
diversion/misappropriation in appropriate court of
law within the State of Odisha following the
provisions of law in force.
IV) The District Manager, OSCSC Ltd. is empowered
to initiate both civil and criminal action against the
defaulting miller in appropriate Court of Law on
behalf of the OSCSC Ltd."
It is submitted that before initiation of the
proceeding the authority did not satisfy itself with the
requirement to arrive at a conclusion that the amount
due is in fact due to the corporation, by confronting the
materials on record to the petitioner. It is submitted that
the petitioner was not served with any notice whatsoever
indicating the amount due/the demand made before
initiating the certificate case.
2. It is further submitted that the audit report which
forms the sole basis of the demand did not have any
scope of seeking any response from the petitioner.
Therefore, the petitioner is completely unaware of the
audit report. The petitioner did not have any opportunity
to place his case before the opposite party-authority who
have entered into agreement with the petitioner-custom
miller for the kharif marketing season-2013-14 dated 8th
day of January, 2014.
3. On the last date when the matter was listed it was
mentioned by the learned instructing counsel, Mr. Parida
for the matter to be taken up. Copy was served on Ms.
Mohanty, learned advocate on record for Opp. Party
No.3.
It is submitted by the learned Senior Counsel, Mr.
Samir Kumar Mishra that he has been engaged by the
learned instructing counsel, Miss P. Mohanty to appear
on behalf of the Corporation.
4. It is submitted by the learned Senior Counsel, Mr.
Samir Kumar Mishra, for the opposite party no.3-
Corporation that internal audit is not the basis of raising
the demand. The corporation has found shortage on its
own by inspection/verification. The internal audit is a
supporting thing of the physical verification by the
corporation. He submits that the submissions get
fortified from the page 68 of the writ petition.
Page 68 which forms part of the proceeding before
the Certificate Officer initiated on 04.03.2021.
5. The learned Senior Counsel for the Corporation
relies on the special audit report at page 84 of the writ
petition i.e. Special Audit Report No.3 of 2018-19. (page
84 of the writ petition) to argue that the principle of
natural justice has been complied with.
6. Issue notice along with this order to the opposite
parties.
7. In view of appearance of Mr. S.K. Mishra, learned
Senior Counsel along with Miss. P. Mohanty, learned
instructing counsel for the opposite party no.3, no
further notice be issued. It is submitted by Miss Mohanty
that she shall be filing Vakalatnama and the appearance
memo during course of the day in the Registry.
The Vakalatnama as well as appearance memo
shall be accepted. Scanned copy be updated.
Mr. P.K. Mohanty, learned Additional Standing
Counsel upon advance copy served, appears on behalf of
opposite party nos.1, 2, 4 to 7 and waives notice.
8. The counter on behalf of opposite party no.3-
District Manager, Odisha State Civil Supplies
Corporation is filed, which shall be taken on record.
Scanned copy be updated.
Copy of the counter has been served on Mr. Parida,
learned instructing counsel on record for the petitioner
and the learned ASC for the State.
9. The learned Senior Counsel, Mr. S.P. Mishra for
the petitioner submits that the petitioner reserve the
liberty to file rejoinder in response to the counter filed
by the opposite party no.3.
The learned ASC for the State seeks further time to
file counter, if so advised and prays for four weeks time.
List 'for orders' in the week commencing
09.03.2026.
10. Heard Mr. S.P. Mishra, learned Senior Advocate for
the petitioner. He reiterates his submissions as noted
above.
I.A. has been filed seeking interim stay of the
operation of the order dated 24.12.2025 passed by the
Collector-cum-Certificate Officer in OPDR Case No.1 of
2021 vide Annexure-5 with a further interim prayer
seeking direction that no coercive action be taken against
the petitioner and not to create any third party interest
over the case land.
11. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the
Corporation vehemently opposes the prayer for any
interim order. He reiterates his submissions as noted
above opposing the prayer for interim order. He submits
that the order passed by the OPDR authority is very clear
to the extent that the Sections 6, 7 and 8 of the OPDR
Act procedure have been followed as prescribed under the
said OPDR Act and Rules.
12. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner refers to
the property schedule as indicated in the order dated
04.03.2021 in OPDR Case No.1 of 2021 (part of
Annexure-5).
Mouza-Kandomunda, Khata Ac.1.400
Khata No.201/64- Ac.2.872 & Ac.0.500
Khata No.97 Ac.8.712
Village-Ichhapur, Khata No.195 Ac.0.255
Village-Sahajbahal, Khata Ac.2.138
No.89
He submits that during pendency of the writ
petition, the said properties shall remain as a security in
support of the prayer for interim order till final
adjudication.
13. It is submitted by the learned Senior Counsel for
the Corporation-opposite party no.3 that entire property
would not satisfy the demand.
It is submitted by the learned Senior Counsel for
the petitioner that the entire property reflected in the
schedule does not fall to the share of the petitioner. At
best the petitioner has a portion of the property devolving
upon him.
14. At this stage, this Court is not entering into the
issue as to the property mentioned in the order dated
04.03.2021 whether belongs to the petitioner or co-
sharers or any other person. However, it is directed the
said property as mentioned in the OPDR proceeding shall
remain as security during pendency of the present writ
application. Status quo regarding the nature, character
and ownership shall be maintained by the parties to the
litigation and all persons.
15. On being asked to furnish cash deposit to the credit
of the present petition, the learned Senior Advocate
submits that the petitioner is a pauper with much
difficulty he can arrange Rs.50,000/- to be deposited
within two weeks.
16. It is directed subject to the deposit of Rs.50,000/-by
05.03.2026, no coercive action shall be taken against the
petitioner. As undertaken by the petitioner and indicated
in the memo filed on behalf of the petitioner by the
learned instructing counsel a further amount of
Rs.50,000/- shall be deposited by 20.03.2026.
Upon deposit of the aforesaid amount(s) before the
learned Registrar (Judicial) of this Court, the said
amount shall be invested in a high interest yielding fixed
deposit with auto-renewal clause to the credit of the
present petition.
17. List 'for orders' in the week commencing
09.03.2026. Aforesaid interim order shall be subject to
the further orders to be passed by this Court.
Liberty to mention.
Urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per
rules. Parties to act upon the copy of this order obtained
from the official website of the Court.
Signed by: JYOSTNARANI MAJHEE (Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo)
Reason: Authentication Judge
Location: OHC
Date: 17-Feb-2026 20:45:57
Jyostna/dutta
