[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Rizi Mohanty vs Manas Ranjan Swain on 19 March, 2026
Author: B. P. Routray
Bench: B. P. Routray
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: CHITTA RANJAN BISWAL
Reason: Authentication
Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack
Date: 19-Mar-2026 18:57:59
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CONTC No.7450 of 2024
Rizi Mohanty .... Petitioner
Mr.A.C.Panda, Advocate
-versus-
Manas Ranjan Swain, Tahasildar,
Bhubaneswar .... Opposite Party
Mr.G.Tripathy, AGA
CORAM:
JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
ORDER
19.03.2026
Order No.
4. 1. Heard Mr.Panda, learned counsel for the Petitioner and
Mr.Tripathy, learned Additional Government Advocate for State-
Opposite Party.
2. Present contempt petition is directed for non-
compliance of the order dated 14th May 2024 of this Court,
wherein the Tahasildar was directed to proceed in accordance
with law in terms of the order dated 31st January 2024 of the
ASO, Rental Colony, Bhubaneswar.
3. Present contempt petition was filed on 22nd October
2024. After filing of the contempt petition, the Tahasildar
immediately filed OSS Case No.948 of 2024 on 4 th November
2024 under Section 32 of the OSS Act before the Member, Board
of Revenue challenging the order dated 31st January 2024 of the
Signed by: CHITTA RANJAN BISWAL
Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack
Date: 19-Mar-2026 18:57:59
ASO. It is stated that said OSS Case No.948 of 2024 is still
pending before the Member, Board of Revenue.
4. The practice of filing belated appeals is always
deprecated and the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in Israr Ahmad Khan
vrs. Amarnath Prasad and others, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 322,
have observed as follows:
BELATED/DELAYED APPEALS TO
DELAY/DEFEAT IMPLEMENTATION
"27. Delayed filing of appeals should be the exception, but in
recent times, the exception has practically evolved to become the
rule. Orders passed by the Courts are not complied with for a
long time, and when Contempt Petitions are filed, belated
appeals, with tremendous delay, are preferred.
28. The (alleged) continuing contumacious conduct of the
defaulting party is sought to be justified on the mere production
of a Diary/Filing/Stamp Reporting Number showing that an
appeal has been preferred, so as to obtain multiple adjournments
in contempt matters.
29. We, in no uncertain terms, deprecate these practices. It is felt
that by such modus operandi, disobedient litigants act brazenly
which has the further effect of bringing down the authority and
majesty of the Courts and the rule of law, interfering in the
administration of justice. The same may well, in certain
situations, border on criminal contempt.
30. The High Courts should deal with such unscrupulous
litigants, moreso when they happen to be „State‟, within the
meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution, or like bodies, with an
iron hand. Unless the High Courts, so also this Court deal with
these aspects firmly, we run the clear risk of erosion of the
unflinching faith that the ordinary litigants of this country repose
in the Judiciary at all levels. It is the solemn duty of all of us
manning the Courts across the hierarchy to ensure that the public
faith never wavers.
PROCEDURAL DIRECTIONS:
31. Registry to forthwith place Review Petition bearing Diary
No.57124/2025 before the appropriate Bench, after obtaining
due permission from Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India. A copy
of this Judgment shall be placed with that Review Petition.
Signed by: CHITTA RANJAN BISWAL
Location: Orissa High Court, Cuttack
Date: 19-Mar-2026 18:57:59
32. Copies of this Judgment be also circulated to the Union
Secretary, Department of Personnel and Training; the Chief
Secretaries to all State Governments, Union Territory
Administrations and the Government of the National Capital
Territory of Delhi, with a direction to take note of what we have
stated above, in respect of Contempt Petitions, whether pending
before this Court or the High Courts, where officers stand
arrayed as individuals. They are at liberty to transmit this
Judgment onward as deemed fit to other officers and concerned
persons."
5. Taking note of the attitude of the contemnor, it is found
that only to frustrate the order of this Court, the belated appeal
has been filed before the Member, Board of Revenue and the
same is stated to be pending till date without any progress.
6. Accordingly, the present Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar is
directed to appear before this Court to answer as to the
circumstances leading to file the appeal by him and the reasons
for non-compliance of the order of this Court.
6. List on 30th April 2026.
( B.P. Routray)
Judge
C.R. Biswal
