IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.1206 of 2025 (In the matter of an application under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India)

Anil Kumar Majhi …. Petitioner -versus-

The State of Odisha, represented …. Opposite Parties through Principal Secretary, Revenue and Disaster Management Department and another Appeared in this case:-

For Petitioner : Mr. S. Dwibedi, Advocate For Respondents : Ms. Babita Kumari Sahu, Learned Additional Government Advocate Appeared in this case:-

CORAM:

JUSTICE A.C. BEHERA

JUDGMENT

Date of hearing : 20.01.2025 / date of judgment : 31.01.2025 A.C. Behera, J. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the petitioner praying for setting aside an order dated 12.10.2023 (Annexure-2) passed in a Mutation Case No.330 of 2023 by the Tahasildar, Naktideul (Opposite Party No.2).

2. The factual backgrounds of this writ petition, which prompted the petitioner for filing of the same is that, one Adikanda Majhi, recorded owner of the properties in Mouza-Badbil under Khata No.2 of Amar Jasprit Dungdung Tahasil under Rairakhol Police Station in the district of Sambalpur bequeathed the properties under the aforesaid Khata No.2 in favour of his wife and children, i.e., the petitioners executing and registering a Will vide Will No.31641600154 dated 31.05.2016.

When the said Testator Adikanda Majhji died, then, the petitioners possessed the aforesaid bequeathed properties and filed a mutation case vide Mutation Case No.330 of 2023 before the Tahasildar, Naktideul(Opposite Party No.2) for the mutation of the properties covered under the Will to their names on the basis of that registered Will No.31641600154 dated 31.05.2016.

As per the order dated 12.10.2023(Annexure-2), the Tahasildar, Naktideul(Opposite Party No.2) dropped that Mutation Case No.330 of

2023 filed by the petitioner assigning reasons that, “the Will has not been probated. Hence, the case is dropped due to incomplete documents”, So, the petitioners challenged that (Annexure-2) passed by the Tahasildar, Naktideul (Opposite Party No.2) by filing this writ petition on the ground that, “When the properties covered under the Will dated 31.05.2016 executed in favour of the petitioners are situated under Rairakhol Police Sttion in the district of Sambalpur and the said Will has also been executed under the jurisdiction of Rairakhol Police Station in the District of Sambalpur, which is outside the areas specified in the Clauses of Section 57 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 and when Sambalpur District was under the ex- princely State, then, the question of probation of that Will dated 31.05.2016 does not arise. For which, The Tahasildar, Naktideul(Opposite Party No.2) should not have dropped the said mutation case as per Annexure-2”.

3. I have already heard from the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State(Opposite Parties).

4. It is the settled propositions of law that, when a Will in question is executed in the Districts, which were coming under the ex-princely State like Mayurbhanj, Bolangir, Koraput, Dhenkanal, Ganjam, Sundargarh, Sambalpur, Angul, Keonjhar, Rayagada, Jharsuguda, Malkanagiri and others, no probate of Will is necessary. In the said Districts, Revenue Authorities and Tahasildars can proceed with the mutation cases on the basis of un-probated Wills.

5. On this aspect, it has already been clarified by the Hon’ble Courts in the ratio of the decisions reported in (I) 1972(2) C.W.R.-1451, Amrutlal Majhi and others vrs.

Japi Sahuani and others. (II) AIR 1973 Orissa-112, Balaram Tripathy and another vrs. Lokanath Tripathy. (III) 48(1979) CLT-211 (Para-8), Mst. Radha Hota vrs. Dutika Satpathy and another, (IV) 2008(I) OLR- 729, Sailabala Satpathy vrs, Parbati Satpathy and others. (V) 2009(II) CLR-155, Aparna Sahu and others vrs. Raghunath Biswal and others. (VI) 2012(II) OLR-394, Kunjabihari Sahu vrs. State of Orissa and others. (VII) 201