IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C) No.35853 of 2025

(An application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950) Dhruti Ranjan Mohanty …. Petitioner

-versus-

State of Odisha and Others …. Opposite Parties

Appeared in this case by Hybrid Arrangement

(Virtual/Physical Mode):

For Petitioner - Mr. Sumanta Bhuyan,

Advocate.

For Opposite Parties - Mr. S. Nayak,

Addl. Standing Counsel

CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.C.BEHERA

Date of Hearing and Judgment :09.01.2026

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 directing the Tahasildar, Dharmagarh (Opposite Party No.4) to receive 2. Heard from the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Addl.

Standing Counsel for the State.

3. The law concerning the duty of the Tahasildar to receive the application or applications, if filed by any person and to act upon the same has already been clarified in the ratio of the following decision:-

In a case between Sunil Kumar Yadav Vrs. District Magistrate, Lucknow and others reported in 2025(3) Civil Court Cases-159 (Allahabad) that, Tahasildar cannot refuse to accept the application for mutation