SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Ori) 531

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA, J.
Dhaneswar Jena – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha and Others – Respondents
W.P. (C) No. 21807 of 2020
Decided On : 23-12-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : S.P. Mishra, P. Das
For the Respondents: G. Mohanty, S. Mohanty, P.K. Parhi, P.N. Nayak

The declaration of Hamlet Nuagaon as a separate revenue village was upheld as compliant with legal requirements, affirming the principles of natural justice were not breached.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 226 and 227 - Challenge to the declaration of Hamlet Nuagaon as a separate revenue village under B.C.P. Case No.1 of 2018 on grounds of lack of notice and opportunity - The impugned order was approved without due process, violating principles of natural justice. (Paras 2, 12, 14)

(B) Natural Justice - The requirement for providing notice and opportunity to stakeholders prior to administrative decisions is critical to uphold fair process and transparency. (Paras 2, 14)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, representing Hamlet Kantabania, challenged the declaration of Hamlet Nuagaon as a separate revenue village claiming lack of notice, engagement, and the improper conduct of the enquiry by authorities. (Paras 1, 4, 7)

Findings of Court:
The court found that the impugned declaration satisfied legal criteria based on established guidelines without violating natural justice principles as the petitioner was afforded appropriate avenues for response and participation. (Paras 10, 12, 14)

Issues: Whether the principles of natural justice were breached in the declaration process and if the order of separation of Hamlet Nuagaon was valid under law. (Paras 2, 14)

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that due process was followed, stating, "the questions of interfering with the impugned order does not arise" as all legal requirements were satisfactorily demonstrated. (Paras 10, 14)

Result: Writ petition dismissed on contest.

Table of Content
1. backdrop and facts of the case. (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments presented by the petitioner and ops. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. court's observations on the legality of the case. (Para 6 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)
4. final legal reasoning leading to the dismissal. (Para 14)
5. conclusion and order passed by the court. (Para 15 , 16)

JUDGMENT :

ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA, J.

1. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of the India, 1950 has been filed by the Petitioner for himself as well as a representative of the Hamlet Kantabania in village Bajrakote under Krushnaprasad Tahasil in the District of Puri praying for quashing the approval of B.C.P. Case No.1 of 2018 passed on dated 16.12.2019 (Annexure-3) by the Director, Land Records & Survey, Odisha (O.P. No.1) i.e. to the declaration of the Hamlet Nuagaon of village Bajrakote as a separate revenue village.

2. The case of the Petitioner is that, he (Petitioner) is a resident of Hamlet Kantabania of village Bajrakote under Krushnaprasad Tahasil in the District of Puri. The village Bajrakote was a revenue village consisting of three Hamlets i.e. Natabania, Kantabania and Nuagaon and the total area of village Bajrakote is Ac.1645.40 decimal.

The Hamlet Kantabania is a flourishing hamlet of village Bajrakote having its own Gochar land, cremation/burial ground and Government land for communal purposes and some communal lands thereof had/have also been using by the residents of the Hamlet Nuagaon, as, the Hamlet Nuagaon of village Bajrakote is adjacent to the Hamlet Kantabania under the revenue village Bajrakote.

On the basis of some political background, the residents of Hamlet Nuagaon made a representation to the Collector, Puri (O.P. No.2) for creation of their Hamlet Nuagaon as a separate revenue village keeping Kantabania, as a Hamlet of their proposed revenue village Nuagaon bifurcating the same from the main village Bajrakote. The said representation of the residents of Hamlet Nuagaon was forwarded by the Collector, Puri (O.P. No.2) to the Tahasildar, Krushnaprasad, Puri (O.P. No.3) for an enquiry and report. The Tahasildar, Krushnaprasad, Puri (O.P. No.3) on being influenced politically submitted a report behind the back of the villagers of Bajrakote as well as the residents of Kantabania in support of the application of the residents of Hamlet Nuagaon for declaration of that Hamlet Nuagaon as a separate revenue village without serving statutory notices on the residents of Bajrakote and Kantabania and without calling upon them to have their say through objections in compliance with Rule 61 (4) of the O.S. & S Rule, 1962. As such, there was no joint verification for creation of boundaries of the newly proposed village i.e. Nuagaon. On the basis of the enquiry report dated 24.07.2019 (Annexure-1) of the Tahasildar, Krushnaprasad, Puri (O.P. No.3), the Collector, Puri (O.P. No.2) as per its order dated 04.11.2019 (Annexure-2) sent his proposal to the Director, Land Records & Survey, Odisha (O.P. No.1) for declaration of Hamlet Nuagaon as a separate revenue village as per Rule 61 of O.S. & S Rules, 1962, which is highly illegal.

On the basis of the recommendations made by the Collector, Puri (O.P. No.2) on dated 04.11.2019 (Annexure-2), the Director, Land Records & Survey, Odisha (O.P. No.1) approved the proposal of the Collector, Puri (O.P. No.2) on dated 16.12.2019 (Annexure-3) in B.C.P. Record No.1 of 2018 and the O.P. No.1 sent the case record to the Collector, Puri (O.P. No.2) for taking follow up actions thereof, to which, the Collector, Puri (O.P. No.2) accepted as per Annexure-4.

When, the Petitioner along with other villagers of Bajrakote and Hamlet Kantabania came to know about the declaration of Hamlet Nuagaon of village Bajrakote as a separate revenue village as per order passed by the O.P. No.1 in B.C.P. Case No.1 of 2018 then, they protested against the same through representations vide Annexure-5 series before the Collector, Puri (O.P. No.2), which is s

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top