Sourava Ranjan Mohanty & Ors. v. State of Odisha & Ors.

CORAM: THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN Order No. ORDER 22.09.2025

The instant Public Interest Litigation is at the behest of four persons claiming themselves to be public spirited persons seeking relief in the nature of mandamus upon the authority to consider the objection/representation dated 26th August, 2025 on the basis of the provisions of Section 4 of the Odisha Municipal Act, 1950 by declaring the “Morada” as Block Headquarter of the Notified Area Council instead of “Chitrada”.

Though the Constitution and any other statutory provisions are silent on the public remedy, the Public Interest Litigation is provided to the citizen of the country as a judge-made remedy. There are checks and balances to be adhered to as every private or personal right or the grievance so raised cannot be brought within the purview of the Public Interest Litigation.

Article 226 of the Constitution of India recognizes the varied forms of the writ to be issued upon the authorities, the Government or the semi-Government or the local bodies including the authority coming within the purview of Article 12 of the Constitution of India, and, therefore the dispute which requires any form of the writ enshrined under Article 226 of the Constitution of India should come with an application in this regard and should not use the extraordinary remedy in the nature of a Public Interest Litigation.

We are not unmindful of the proposition that the Public Interest Litigation in recent times has gained a momentum where the government or its instrumentalities are reminded of their Constitutional obligation imposed upon them and to act strictly within the purview thereof, but such extraordinary remedy should not be encouraged nor be permitted for the purpose of securing the relief attributable to them by a clever draftsmanship creating an illusory cause of action that it would inure to the benefit of public at large.

4.1. The instant case is one of the classic examples of the same where a notification was issued by the Governor on 16th August, 2025 proposing to include several villages and the concerned Gram Panchayat at “Chitrada” as transitional area. The said notification is precursor to an ultimate decision to be taken, whether those areas can be declared as the transitional area, as the objection was invited from all and the sundry within a specified time. The pith and substance as we gathered from the said notification is that the same is issued and/or published to take a conscious decision after taking into account the objections, if any, filed within the specific time, and, therefore, it cannot be said to be a conclusive opinion or a decision taken by the Governor.

Article 243-Q of the Constitution of India provides for the constitution of the Nagar Panchayat for a transitional area, that is to say, an area in transition from a rural area to an urban area, a Municipal Council for a smaller urban area and a Municipal Corporation for a larger urban area. Clause (2) of the said Article not only defines “a transitional area”, “a smaller urban area” or “a larger urban area”, but the parameters to be considered before a final decision is taken thereupon, have been specified, meaning thereby, before taking such conclusive decision, the Government may take into account the population of the area, the density of the population, the revenue generated for local administration, the percentage of employment in non-agricultural activities, the economic importance or such other factors as he may deem fit.

5.1. Apropos the constitutional obligation imposed upon the State/Governor, the Odisha Municipal Act, 1950 also contained exhaustive mechanism in relation thereto or connected therewith. Section 4 of the said Act is, in fact, the replication of the provisions contained under Article 243-Q of the Constitution, but with a proviso that before the publication of the notification, the State Government shall invite objections and suggestions from all persons likely to be affected, which shall be considered after the same are received in connection with the said draft notification. The tenet of said notification leads to an inescapable perception that it is a draft notification inviting objection and not a conclusive decision in declaring the transitional area.

The objection filed by the petitioners or the other persons is in relation to declaring “Chitrada” as the transitional area instead of “Morada” as Notified Area Council. The said objection is under consideration of the Government and it is beyond cavil of doubt that the final decision would be taken after the said objection is considered, and, therefore, the instant so-called Public Interest Litigation is vexatious, harassive and is filed only to gain publicity.

We, thus, do not find that this writ petition in the nature of Public Interest Litigation for such relief is maintainable, and as such, the same is hereby dismissed with costs of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand) to be paid by the petitioners to the High Court Bar Association Advocates’ Welfare Fund, Cuttack within a period of one week from date and the receipt thereof shall be filed before the Registry. (Harish Tandon) Chief Justice (M.S. Raman) Judge Bichi Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BICHITRANANDA SAHOO Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 25-Sep-2025 11:51:24