Orders issued without compliance with principles of natural justice are deemed illegal; all parties must be given a chance to be heard.

Judgment :

A.C. Behera, J.

1. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the petitioners praying for quashing (setting aside) the order dated 18.12.2024 (Annexure-1) passed in Revision Petition No.388 of 2022 under Section 15 (b) of O.S. & S. Act, 1958 by the Commissioner, Land Records & Settlement, Odisha, Cuttack on the ground of non-compliance of the principles of natural justice stating in their writ petition that, Revision Petition No.388 of 2022 was heard by the Commissioner, Land Records & Settlement, Odisha, Cuttack in their absence and the impugned final order dated 18.12.2024 (Annexure-1) was passed without hearing from them (petitioners), though they (petitioners) were the O.P. Nos.1 to 4 in the Revision Petition No.388 of 2022 before the Commissioner, Land Records & Settlement, Odisha, Cuttack.

2. I have already heard from the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for O.P. Nos.1 & 2 and learned Standing Counsel for the State (O.P. No.3).

3. During the course of hearing of this writ petition, the learned counsel for the petitioners contended that, in the Revision Petition No.388 of 2022, O.P. Nos.1 & 2 of this writ petition were the petitioners and the petitioners in this writ petition were the O.P. Nos.1 to 4 in the said Revision Petition No.388 of 2022. The Tahasildar, Bari was the O.P. No.5 in that said Revision Petition No.388 of 2022.

4. It is also the contentions of the learned counsels of both the sides that, the Standing Counsel for the State had appeared in Revision Petition No.388 of 2022 for O.P. No.5 i.e. for the Tahasildar, Bari.

5. When, during the course of hearing of this writ petition, learned counsel for the petitioners contended that, the impugned order dated 18.12.2024 (Annexure-1) in Revision Petition No.388 of 2022 was passed without giving opportunity of being heard to the petitioners (O.P. Nos.1 to 4 in Revision Petition No.388 of 2022), to which, learned counsel for O.P. Nos.1 & 2 in this writ petition (petitioners in Revision Petition No.388 of 2022) objected contending that, the impugned order dated 18.12.2024 (Annexure-1) was passed by the Commissioner, Land Records & Settlement, Odisha, Cuttack in Revision Petition No.388 of 2022 after hearing from both the sides including the petitioners in this writ petition (those were O.P. Nos.1 to 4 in Revision Petition No.388 of 2022).

6. It appears from Paragraph No.3 of the impugned order dated 18.12.2024 (Annexure-1) passed in Revision Petition No.388 of 2022 by the Commissioner, Land Records & Settlement, Odisha, Cuttack that, the said impugned order has been passed without giving opportunity of being heard to the O.P. Nos.1 to 4 of that Revision (petitioners in this writ petition) and without complying the principles of natural justice.

7. In order to have a clarity in this judgment, I thought it proper to place it on record to the Paragraph No.3 of the impugned order dated 18.12.2024 (Annexure-1) passed in Revision Petition No.388 of 2022 and the same is:-

“the counsel for the petitioners and Standing Counsel for Opp. Party No.4 (State) were present and heard. The Counsel for the Opposite Parties was present previously on 11.10.2023.”

8. In fact, Standing Counsel was not the learned Counsel for O.P. No.4, but the learned Standing Counsel was the Counsel for O.P. No.5 in Revision Petition No.388 of 2022 i.e. for the Tahasildar, Bari. Because, O.P. No.4 in the Revision Petition No.388 of 2022 is Anupama Dash (petitioner No.4 in this writ petition).

9. The above