[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Nityananda Mahanty And vs The State Of Odisha And ..... Opposite ... on 29 January, 2026
Author: Sashikanta Mishra
Bench: Sashikanta Mishra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.20354 of 2025
Nityananda Mahanty and ..... Petitioners
others
Represented by
Mr.S. Mahunta, Adv
-versus-
The State of Odisha and ..... Opposite Parties
others
Represented by
A.G.A.
CORAM:
JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA
ORDER
Order No. 29.1.2026.
06. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and learned Addl.
Government Advocate for the State.
3. As directed, learned State counsel has obtained instructions
including the photostat copy of the application under Form-25
in which the signatures of the Petitioners appear.
4. The Petitioners have approached this Court with the
following prayer:
// 2 //
"In view of the aforesaid fact and
circumstances, this Hon'ble court may
graciously be pleased to:
(i)Admit the writ petition and call for the
record.
(ii) Quash the order under annexure-6 and 7
passed by the Opp. Party no. 3 by concurrently
holding the same is bad, illegal, and cannot be
sustainable in the eyes of the law.
And further be pleased to hold/declare the
Kissam of land is "Bari" as per the Sabik ROR
issued in the year 1930 and the draft ROR
(Parcha) issued in the name of petitioners as
kissam of land is "Gharabari" is a valid one.
(iv) And pass such other direction/directions as
this Hon'ble Court deemed order/orders, just
and proper;
And for this act of kindness, the petitioner is
duty-bound shall ever pray.
5. Originally they had approached the Court of Commissioner,
Consolidation, Board of Revenue in a Revision under Section
15(b) of the O.S.S.Act registered as Revision Petition
No.630/2016. Said revision was disposed of by order dated
24.5.2017, inter alia, with the following observation;
"Gone through Hal ROR No.5, RSOs No.867
dated 25.02.1948, 2887 dated 18.06.1973, RSD
No.3555 dated 04.05.1962 & RSD No.1925 dated
28.03.1950, L.R. Parcha, Sabik ROR No.1722. On
verification of the above documents on record, it
is evident that the disputed land has been
recorded in favour of the petitioners jointly on the
basis of purchase through above RSDs by their
predecessor namely Arjuna Mohanty. Now the
petitioners are praying partition of the suit joint
holding No.5. Hence, Tahasildar is directed to
// 3 //
conduct field enquiry in presence of all the
recorded owners and effect, partition as per law.
Regarding the 2nd prayer of correction of the
classification of the suit Hal Plot No.2472 the
Tahasildar, Kendrapara is directed to conduct
field enquiry & correct the Kissam, of the suit
land as per law. The Revision Petition is disposed
of accordingly."
6. The matter being thus remitted to the Tahasildar,
Kendrapara. By order dated 17.10.2017, the Tahasildar taking
note of the field inquiry report, held as follows;
"This case record is put up today. Heard the
parties present. Perused records and documents
filed. Also perused the field enquiry report of the
Amin attached to this case record.
As the sabik kisam of the suit land is bari and the
Petitioner is directed to apply as per OLR.8(1)(c)
for conversion of the land to Gharabari as he has
already constructed this dwelling house over the
plot and fix rent from the date of construction of
dwelling house over the suit plot and correct
accordingly."
7. Mr. Mahunta, learned counsel for the Petitioners assails
the impugned order by submitting that the Tahasildar has no
jurisdiction to relegate the Petitioners to invoke the remedy
under Section 8(1)(c) of the O.L.R. Act for conversion of the
land. He further submits that the Amin report clearly mentions
that the land was recorded as 'bari' in sabik record, but
recorded as 'jalasaya', for which he submitted his report
recommending recording of the land as 'gharabari' instead of
'jalasaya'.
// 4 //
8. This is a matter that can be considered only by the
Commissioner exercising power under Section 15(b) of the
O.S.S. Act.
9. Learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State fairly submits
that the Tahasildar has no power to pass any order in this regard
and only the Commissioner of Consolidation is empowered to
do so.
10. Taking note of the facts and the submissions made, the
Writ Petition is allowed. The impugned orders under
Annexures-6 and 7 are hereby quashed. Further, the order
dated 24.5.2017 passed by the Commissioner, Consolidation
under Annexure-4 is also set aside. The matter is remitted to the
Commissioner to decide the revision afresh taking note of the
field inquiry report of the Amin submitted on 21.9.2017. The
revision shall be disposed of early as possible, preferably
within a period of two months from today.
11. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper
application.
(Sashikanta Mishra)
Judge
AKB
Designation: A.D.R.-cum-Addl. Principal Secretary
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 29-Jan-2026 18:44:01
