Niranjan Rohidas & Anr. v. State of Odisha & Ors.
Case at a glance
Key paragraphs
- Para 66. In view of such submission, the writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn with a liberty to the Petitioners to file a fresh writ petition with better particulars within a period of one month hence. (K.R. Mohapatra) Judge (S.K. Mishra) Judge Sashikant Signature Not…
Judgment
…. Mr. Byomokesh Sahoo, Advocate -versus- Petitioners State of Odisha and others …. Opp. Parties Mr. Manmaya Kumar Dash, Additional Standing Counsel CORAM: JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA Order No. ORDER 07.04.2026
This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
This writ petition has been filed with a prayer to release fifty per cent of the compensation amount in respect of Khata No.41 of Mouza- Karlikachhar the District of Sundargarh in favour of the present Petitioners.
Mr. Sahoo, learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that inadvertently some relevant documents like order of the Claims Commission could not be enclosed to the writ petition for just adjudication.
Hence, he prays for withdrawal of the writ petition seeking liberty to file a fresh one with better particulars.
Mr. Dash, learned Additional Standing Counsel does not have any objection to the same.
In view of such submission, the writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn with a liberty to the Petitioners to file a fresh writ petition with better particulars within a period of one month hence. (K.R. Mohapatra) Judge (S.K. Mishra) Judge Sashikant Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: MADHUSMITA SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 07-Apr-2026 18:32:29
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.