Sri Padukai Thakurani vs State Of Odisha And Others .... Opp. ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 2901 Ori

Orissa High Court

Sri Padukai Thakurani vs State Of Odisha And Others .... Opp. ... on 25 March, 2026

Author: K.R. Mohapatra

Bench: K.R. Mohapatra

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                 W.P.(C). NO.6931 OF 2026

                 Sri Padukai Thakurani, Khordha and       ....       Petitioners
                 others
                                            Mr. Sarat Chandra Mekap, Advocate
                                           -versus-

                 State of Odisha and others                      ....       Opp. Parties

                                                            Mr. Swayambhu Mishra,
                                                         Additional Standing Counsel

                            CORAM:
                            JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
                            JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

                                           ORDER

25.03.2026 Order No.

1. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2. Petitioners in this writ petition pray for the following relief:

"The petitioners therefore, most humbly prays that this Hon'ble Court may be graciously pleased to admit this case after hearing both the sides may be pleased to issue writ of mandamus/certiorari or any other writ or direction which will deem fit and proper to the case by directing Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Endowment, Bhubaneswar (O.P. No.1) allow the application dtd.01.12.2024 of the petitioners for functioning of Committee of Sri Padukai Thakurani in the district of Khordha within a specific period;

And for which act of kindness, the petitioners shall as in duty bound, ever pray."

3. In course of argument, Mr. Mekap, learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that adequate remedy is available to the Petitioner under the Orissa Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1951 (for brevity, 'the Act') for redressal of their grievances. Hence, he prays for withdrawal of the writ petition to move the

Competent Authority under the Act for redressal of their grievances.

4. Mr. Mishra, learned Additional Standing Counsel raised a preliminary objection submitting that the description of Opposite Party No.1 is improper. He further submits that the writ petition is thoroughly misconceived. He, however, does not have objection to the prayer for withdrawal of the writ petition.

5. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn with an observation that the Petitioners, if so advised, may move the Competent Authority under the Act for redressal of their grievances.

(K.R. Mohapatra) Judge

(S.K. Mishra) Judge Kanhu

Designation: JUNIOR STENOGRAPHER Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 26-Mar-2026 21:06:33