ORISSA HIGH COURT : CUTTACK

WP(C) No.27146 of 2025

An application under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of

India. ***

Kalakar Pradhan & Another

… Petitioners.

-VERSUS-

The Commissioner, C & S, Board of Revenue, Odisha,

Cuttack & Another

… Opposite Parties

Counsel appeared for the parties:

For the Petitioners : Mr. P.K. Das, Advocate

For the Opposite Parties : Mr. S. Nayak, Addl. Standing Counsel.

P R E S E N T: HONOURABLE

MR. JUSTICE ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA

Date of Hearing : 26.09.2025 :: Date of Judgment : 26.09.2025

JUDGMENT

ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA, J.

1.

This writ petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the petitioners praying for directing the Tahasildar, Aul (Opp. Party No.2) to carry out (implementation of) the order dated 17.04.2019 passed in R.P. No.310 of 2015 by the Commissioner, Consolidation & Settlement, Board of Revenue, Odisha, Cuttack (Opp. Party No.1). Because, till yet, in spite of direction by the Commissioner, Consolidation & Settlement, Board of Revenue, Odisha, Cuttack (Opp. Party No.1) as per order dated 17.04.2019 passed in Revision Petition No.310 of 2015 to the Tahasildar, Aul (Opp. Party No.2) to conduct field enquiry after verifying the original Jamabandi and tenant’s ledger available with Tahasil Office Record Room and pass appropriate order on the claim of the petitioners as per law and to implement that order within two months, the Tahasildar has not implemented the said order.

2. Heard from the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the Opp. Parties.

3. The law relating to the scope of interference of the High Court in the matter of non-implementation of the directions of the superior officers of the Government to their sub-ordinate officers has already been clarified in the ratio of the following decision of the Apex Court.

In a case between Jayamma & Others Vrs. Deputy Commissioner, Hassan, Dist., Hassan & Others (Para No.10) reported in III (2013) CLT 94 (SC) that, “if a subordinate authority in the Government does not act in terms of the directions or instructions issued by the superior authority, it is not for the High Court to compel that subordinate authority to comply with the instruction or directions issued by the superior authority of the Government. Because, High Court is not the executing forum of instructions or directions issued by the superior officers of the Government. It is the duty of the superior officers of the Government (who had directed the sub-ordinate officer) to see that, their orders are properly implemented, but not the High Court to implement their directions or orders.”

4. So, by applying the propositions of law enunciated in the ratio of the above decision of the Apex Court to this matter at hand, it is felt proper to dispose of this writ petition finally, giving liberty to the petitioners to approach the Opp. Party No.1 filing an application annexing the certified copy of this Judgment praying for implementation of the order dated 17.04.2019 passed by the Opp. Party No.1 in R.P. No.310 of 2015 and if after filing of such application before the Opp. Party No.1, there is no response by the Opp. Party No.1 to the same, then, the petitioners can approach the High Court seeking appropriate relief for the same.

5. On the basis of the aforesaid directions and observations, this writ petition filed by the petitioners is disposed of finally.

(ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA)

JUDGE High Court of Orissa, Cuttack The 26 .09. 2025// Rati Ranjan Nayak Sr. Stenographer Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: RATI RANJAN NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack, India.

Date: 27-Sep-2025 10:34:52