IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.34041 of 2025 Santilata Mandal …. Petitioner Represented by Adv.–

Mr. Laxmidhar Dash, Advocate -Versus-

State of Odisha and others …. Opposite Parties Represented by Adv.–

Mr. Debasis Tripathy, A.G.A. for the State CORAM:

HON’ BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

ORDER

Order No. 11.12.2025

02. 1. The instant writ petition is filed challenging the auction sale notice dated 20^th November, 2025 issued by the OIC of Excise, Jatni Excise Station, Khordha for sale of diverse quantity of the country liquor of different quality which was confiscated having attempted to be sold beyond the licence area.

2. A proceeding under Section 71 (3) of the Odisha Excise Act, 2008 was initiated on the prayer of the OIC, Jatni Excise Station as the petitioner was attempting to transport 2165 liters of country liquor on 4^th February, 2025 in a vehicle without any valid permission and/or the authority granted by the concerned authority. The vehicle was intercepted and the goods were seized after following all the paraphernalia required in this regard. Since the said offence allegedly attracts the provisions under Section 71 of the said Act, the confiscation proceeding was initiated against the petitioner. On 6^th September, 2025, the summons was also issued, which was duly served upon the petitioner and on the dates so mentioned in the said summons, the petitioner appeared through the present Advocate who filed the Vakalatnama on the said date and asked for an adjournment as the petitioner was suffering from viral fever and unable to remain present personally. The said proceeding was before the Superintendent of Excise and on taking a pragmatic view and on a humanitarian ground that the petitioner was suffering from viral fever, the time was granted till 19^th September, 2025. On the said returnable date, there was no appearance on behalf of the petitioner and to give further opportunity, another date was fixed as 26^th September, 2025. The Superintendent of Excise, Khordha passed the order on the event date and disposed of the proceeding by directing the OIC, Jatni Excise Station to sell the seized country liquor through auction by following the established procedure after the appeal period is over.

3. The aforesaid order passed by the Superintendent of Excise is not assailed in the instant writ petition. The case of the petitioner in the instant writ petition is that Section 71 (3) of the said Act mandates the steps to be taken under the said provision by Collector or authorized officer not below the rank of the Superintendent of Excise and, therefore, OIC of Jatni Excise Station being a person below the rank of the Superintendent of Excise is not competent to pass the order. In other words, it is sought to be contended that though the hearing was conducted by the Superintendent of Excise, but in fact, the order is passed by an Officer below the said rank and, therefore, such order is per se illegal and liable to be quashed and set aside.

4. On the day, when the writ petition was moved for admission perceiving the aforesaid point to have clinched the issue, the direction was passed upon the learned Additional Government Advocate to take instructions and file the relevant documents in the form of a counter affidavit. The counter affidavit is filed today containing the relevant documents having material bearing on the issues involved in the instant writ petition and a copy whereof is served upon the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

4.1. It is apparent from the document annexed to the counter affidavit, more particularly, the orders passed in a confiscation proceeding initiated before the Superintendent of Excise that the petitioner after receiving the summons appeared before the said authority and sought for adjournment on the ground that the petitioner was suffering from viral fever. Interestingly, it is averred in the writ petition that since the petitioner was on pilg