The court directed the Tahasildar to dispose of an uncontested mutation case within eight weeks, emphasizing prompt compliance with legal procedures outlined in the Odisha Right to Public Services Act.

JUDGMENT :

SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA, J.

1. Heard Mr. Rao, learned Counsel for the Petitioner so also Mr. Dash, learned ASC, who accepts notice on behalf of the Opposite Parties and admits to have received copy of the writ petition.

2. An innocuous prayer has been made in the writ petition to direct the Tahasildar, Kaniha (Opposite Party No.2) to dispose of Mutation Case No.284 of 2021 within a specified period. Hence, on consent of learned Counsel for the parties, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at the stage of admission.

3. As is revealed from the pleadings made in the writ petition, the present Petitioner, based on a judgment and decree passed in C.S. No.20 of 2006 dated 16.01.2009 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Talcher, filed Mutation Case No.355 of 2009 for correction of RoR. Because of inaction of the concerned Tahasildar, W.P.(C) No.18802 of 2010 was preferred by the Petitioner before this Court, wherein a direction was given to dispose of Mutation Case No.355 of 2009 expeditiously by end of June, 2011. However, the Tahasildar did not act in terms of said order passed in W.P.(C) No.18802 of 2010. Because of bifurcation of Tahasils, the Petitioner preferred a fresh Mutation Case, which was registered as Mutation Case No.284 of 2021 before the present Opposite Party No.2 (Tahasildar, Kaniha). Because of inaction of the Opposite Party No.2 to dispose of the said mutation case, the Petitioner approached this Court in W.P.(C) No.5466 of 2023 which was disposed of vide order dated 10.03.2023, directing the Tahasildar, Kanhia (Opposite Party No.2) to dispose of the said mutation case, if pending, in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of communication of the said order. Though the said order was communicated to the Opposite Party No.2 on 14.05.2023, which was duly acknowledged by the Head Clerk, Tahasil Office, Kaniha on 16.05.2023 (Annexure-3), till date the said mutation case is allegedly pending for disposal.

4. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, drawing attention of this Court to the legal opinion given by the Government Pleader, Angul dated 05.10.2023, as at Annexure-4 submits, pursuant to direction of this Court in W.P.(C) No.5466 of 2023, an opinion was sought for by the Tahasildar, Kaniha from the Government Pleader, Angul who opined to correct the RoR. The Petitioner was hopeful that the Tahasildar, Kaniha shall do the needful, as advised by the Government Pleader, Angul. Accordingly, the Petitioner did not prefer any contempt proceeding for willful flouting of order dated 10.03.2023 passed in W.P.(C) No.5466 of 2023. Thereafter, since the Tahasildar, Kaniha did not do the needful, being remediless, now the Petitioner has preferred the present writ petition seeking for a direction to the Opposite Parties to record the name of the Petitioner in the suit land measuring an Ac.028 decimals, resting with Khata No.121 and Plot No.345 in the Revenue Village-Dumuduma coming under Angul District in terms of the judgment and decree passed in C.S. No.20 of 2006.

5. Learned Counsel for the State submits, despite direction of this Court so also opinion of learned Government Pleader, Angul, though the alleged inaction of the Opposite Party No.2-Tahasildar, Kaniha to correct the RoR, as prayed vide Mutation Case No.284 of 2021, seems to be correct, but the reason for such inaction is yet to be ascertained. He further submits, with the self-same prayer as made in W.P.(C) No.5466 of 2023, the writ petition is not maintainable.

6. Admittedly, the reason to prefer the present writ petition has been duly explained