The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.14518 OF 2025 (An application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India) ***** Arati Ray, W/o- Bibhuti Bhusan Ray, Plot No.621, G.G.P. Colony, Rasulgarh, P.S.-Mancheswar, Bhubaneswar, Dist-Khurda …… Petitioner -Versus- (1) State of Odisha, represented by it’s Secretary to Revenue and Disaster Management Department, At-Lok Seva Bhawan, Bhubaneswar, Dist-Khurda (2) The Additional Commissioner, Under Member, Board of Revenue, Odisha, 4th Floor, HOD Building, Bhubaneswar, Dist- Khurda (3) The Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar, Dist-Khurda (4) The Additional Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar, At-Bhubaneswar, Dist-Khurda
Legal Reasoning
(5) Smt. Sailabala Sethi, W/o-Late Bhaskar Sethi (6) Manoj Kumar Sethi, S/o.Late Bhaskar Sethi (Both Sl. Nos. 5 and 6 are of At/P.O.-Paikarapur, P.S.-Chandaka, Via-Janla, Dist-Khurda) .…… Opp. Parties Advocates appeared: For Petitioner : Mr. Prafulla Kumar Rath, Sr. Advocate Ms.Sradha Das, Advocate For Opp. Parties : Mr. Siba Narayan Biswal, Additional Standing Counsel W.P.(C) No.14518 OF 2025 Page 1 of 7 CORAM : JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO ------------------------------------------------
Decision
Heard and disposed of on 02.09.2025 ---------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT By the Bench; 1. The Petitioner, in this writ application, seeks to assail the order dated 11th April, 2025 passed by the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar (Opposite Party No.3) in Mutation Case No.29183 of 2022 (Annexure-1). 2. Mr. Rath, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Petitioner submits that under a piece of government land pertaining to Sabik Plot No.324/1245 in Sabik Khata No. 424/59 having total area of Ac.0.575 dec. of Mouza- Sankarpur, Tahasil- Bhubaneswar was leased out in favour of one Bhaskar Sethi in W.L. Case No.909 of 1972 and recorded as such in the name of the lessee. When the matter stood thus, the Petitioner purchased an area of Ac.0.100 dec. corresponding to Hal Plot No.2447 (Ac.0.1250 Dec.) and Hal Plot No.2448 (Ac.0.1800 Dec.) under Hal Khata No. 2077 of Mouza- Sankarpur, Tahasil- Bhubaneswar (for brevity ‘the case land’) from the leasehold property of said Bhaskar Sethi vide registered sale deed No.1910 dated 23rd December, 1985, which is supported by a permission under Section 22 of the Odisha Land Reforms Act, 1960 obtained by said Bhaskar Sethi (the lessee). Subsequently, the entire leasehold property of said Bhaskar Sethi including the land purchased by the Petitioner was resumed in exercise of power under section 3-B of W.P.(C) No.14518 OF 2025 Page 2 of 7 the Odisha Government Land Settlement Act, 1962 (for brevity, ‘the OGLS Act’). The Petitioner being not noticed was not aware of the said order. When the order of resumption came to her notice, the Petitioner challenged the same in W.P.(C) No.19387 of 2009. This Court vide order dated 29th July, 2011 (Annexure-2) set aside the order of resumption so far as it relates to the extent of land purchased by the Petitioner. Thereafter, the Petitioner filed a mutation case to record the case land in her name. The said mutation case was registered as Misc. Case No.79 of 2012 on the file of Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar. Since no order was passed in the said mutation case, the Petitioner filed W.P.(C) No.8308 of 2014, which was disposed of on 25.06.2014 (Annexure-3) with a direction to the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar to dispose of mutation case within a period of four months from the date of production of certified copy of the said order. When the matter stood thus, the land purchased by the Petitioner was recorded in the name of the State Government in the settlement operation. Thus, the Petitioner filed a Revision under Section 15(b) of the Odisha Survey Settlement Act, 1958 (for brevity, the Settlement Act’) to correct the entries made in the Record of Right and record the case land in her favour. The said revision under Section 15(b) of the Settlement Act was registered as OSS Case No.1109 of 2019. The said revision was disposed of vide order dated 29th July, 2022 (Annexure-6) with a direction to the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar to record the case land in the name of the Petitioner after verifying the original documents and following the policy decision of Government of Odisha. In spite of such direction, the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar did not take any step to record the land in the name W.P.(C) No.14518 OF 2025 Page 3 of 7 of the Petitioner. Thus, she filed Mutation Case No.29183 of 2022 to record the land in her name. No order was also passed in the said mutation case. Accordingly, the Petitioner filed W.P.(C) No.27385 of 2023, which was disposed of on 30th August, 2023 (Annexure-7) directing the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar to dispose of the Mutation Case No.29183 of 2022 in accordance with law. 3. Pursuant to the said direction, the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar rejected the said mutation case vide order dated 23rd February, 2024. The said order was challenged before this Court in W.P.(C) No.8473 of 2024 and it was disposed of on 24th September, 2024 with the following direction:- xxx xxx xxx “xxx 6.3. Therefore, this Court while quashing the order dtd.23.02.2024 so passed by Opposite Party No.4 under Annexure-8, remits the matter to the said authority to record the land in the name of the Petitioner so purchased by him from the original lessee taking into account the nature of the land and its use within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of this order.” 4. Most surprisingly the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar purportedly assuming power under section 3-B of the OGLS Act passed the impugned order dated 11th April, 2025 (Annexure-1), which is impugned herein. 5. Mr. Rath, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Petitioner submits that the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar does not have the power to exercise jurisdiction under Section 3-B of the OGLS Act to resume the land to Government Khata more particularly when the order passed under Section 3-B of the OGLS Act has already been set aside by this Court in W.P.(C) No.19387 of 2009. W.P.(C) No.14518 OF 2025 Page 4 of 7 After the aforesaid developments, the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar had no other option than to record the land in the name of the Petitioner and prepare the Record of Right accordingly. 6. Mr.Biswal, learned Additional Standing Counsel submits that there is no dispute to the factual submission made by Mr.Rath, learned Senior Advocate, which is based on record. He further submits that since the leasehold property was not utilized for the purpose for which the lease was granted in favour of Bhaskar Sethi, no illegality has been committed by the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar in resuming the same under Section 3-B of the OGLS Act. It is further submitted that the direction made by this Court in W.P.(C) No.8473 of 2024 has been complied with in its letter and spirit. The Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar applying its mind passed the impugned order, which is reasoned one. Hence, the same warrants no interference. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties at length. Perused the materials available on record. 8. Since the factual position is not disputed, this Court does not feel it necessary to reiterate the same. Fact remains that the leasehold property was settled in favour of one Bhaskar Sethi in W.L. Case No.909 of 1972. Taking permission of the competent Authority under the OLR Act, the lessee sold the case land (out of the leasehold property) to the Petitioner by virtue of registered sale deed No.1910 dated 23rd December, 1985. There is also no dispute to the fact that the Petitioner is in possession over the case land. Resumption proceeding under Section 3-B of the OGLS Act initiated earlier has already been set aside by this Court vide order W.P.(C) No.14518 OF 2025 Page 5 of 7 dated 29th July, 2011 (Annexure-2) in W.P.(C) No.19387 of 2009 to the extent it relates to the case land. The said order has not been challenged and attained its finality. In the settlement operation the case land was recorded in Government Khata. The Petitioner being aggrieved filed OSS Case No. 1109 of 2019. The said revision was disposed of vide order dated 29th July, 2022 (Annexure-6) with a direction to the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar to record the case land in the name of the Petitioner after verifying the original documents and following the policy decision of Government of Odisha. It also appears that in spite of repeated directions of Member, Board of Revenue, Odisha and also this Court, more fully stated by Mr. Rath, learned Senior Advocate and not disputed by Mr. Biswal, learned ASC, the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar is bent upon to see that the case land is not recorded in the name of the Petitioner. On perusal of the affidavit filed by the Petitioner in Court today, we find that no ground is made out to deny recording of the case land in the name of the Petitioner. Hence, the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar had no jurisdiction to sit over the order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.19387 of 2009 and direct for resumption of the land purchased by the Petitioner. In view of the direction made by this Court in W.P.(C) No.8473 of 2024, the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar had no other option than to record the case land in favour of the Petitioner. 9. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 11th April, 2025 passed in Mutation Case No.29183 of 2022 (Annexure-1) is set aside. Since the Petitioner is fighting out the litigation to record the case land in her name from the date of purchase, it is directed that the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar shall record the case land in favour of W.P.(C) No.14518 OF 2025 Page 6 of 7 the Petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, within a period of four weeks hence, as undertaken by the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar and hand over the corrected Record of Right to her by that time. 9.1. Since the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar is present in Court, he is directed to take immediate steps in terms of direction made above. Personal appearance of Mr.Mrutyunjay Tripathy, Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar is dispensed herewith. 10. The writ petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent. In the fact and circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs. (K.R. Mohapatra) Judge (Savitri Rath) Judge Orissa High Court, Cuttack, Dated 2nd September, 2025/Himansu Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: HIMANSU SEKHAR DASH Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 09-Sep-2025 11:40:46 W.P.(C) No.14518 OF 2025 Page 7 of 7