Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
DIXIT KRISHNA SHRIPAD, CHITTARANJAN DASH
Sanjeeb Kumar Kar – Appellant
Versus
Anadi Charan Giri – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
KRISHNA S. DIXIT, J.
A returned candidate in the Grama Panchayat election, who happens to be Sarpanch, is invoking Intra-Court appellate jurisdiction for laying a challenge to a learning Single Judge’s order dated 21.07.2025, whereby his WP(C) No.28275 of 2022 has been negatived. In the said Writ Petition, he had called in question the order dated 29.09.2022 passed by learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division) in pending Election Misc. Case No.20 of 2022, whereby the delay in filing the challenge has been condoned.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the Appellant vehemently submits that the order of the learned Single Judge is liable to be voided on the following grounds:
(a) Learned Single Judge grossly erred in holding that, against order of the Civil Judge an appeal lies under section 38(4) of the Odisha Grama Panchayat Act, 1964, when the consistent view of this Court is to the contrary;
(b) Learned Single Judge would not have held that the Coordinate Bench’s decision inNiranjan Sahu v. Narasu Satpathy, AIR 1970 ORI 46 , is per incuriam in view of decision in Digambar Pradhan v. Arjun Pradhan 1972(1) C.W.R. 74.
(c) When the impugned order does not in so many words say under which
The court established that an order under Article 227 is not subject to intra-court appeal and that jurisdiction classification hinges on the substance of the case rather than the specific article in....
The court ruled that election disputes, including delay in petitions, should follow the statutory remedies provided under the Orissa Gram Panchayat Act, emphasizing the appeal process over writ juris....
An intra-court appeal is not maintainable against orders of a learned Single Judge under Section 24-C of the Orissa Education Act, 1969, as per the Full Bench ruling prohibiting such appeals post-ame....
The court ruled that appeals against orders made under Article 227 of the Constitution are not maintainable, emphasizing the jurisdictional distinction between Articles 226 and 227.
A court must ensure that any interim orders affecting parties' rights are made only after providing an opportunity for all concerned parties to be heard, reinforcing the principle of fair hearing.
The court upheld the Single Judge's decision, emphasizing the importance of judicial review in administrative actions and the need for civil courts to resolve disputes between factions in a registere....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of Rule 18(3) of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960 and the prospective effect of the amendment to the Maharashtra....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
