IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C) No.19669 of 2025

(An application under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950)

Bidyulata Samantray and another …. Petitioners

-versus-

State of Odisha and others …. Opposite Parties

Appeared in this case by Hybrid Arrangement

(Virtual/Physical Mode):

For Petitioners - Ms. Deepali Mahapatra,

Advocate.

For Opposite Parties- Mr. G. Mohanty,

Learned Sanding Counsel

CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.C.BEHERA

Date of Hearing :25.11.2025 :: Date of Judgment :25.11.2025

A.C. Behera, J. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners

under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 praying for quashing of the impugned order dated 03.02.2020(Annexure-8) passed by the Additional Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar(Opposite Party No.5) in Revenue

Misc. Case No.161 of 2016.

2. The factual backgrounds of the writ petition, which prompted to the petitioners for filing of the same is that, rent of the case land was fixed by the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar in Revenue Misc. Case No.161 of 2016 as per order dated 16.07.2019 and on the basis of the fixation of rent of the case land by the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar in Revenue Misc. Case No.161 of 2016, the RoR of the case was prepared in the names of the petitioners and the petitioners were paying rent for the same and the petitioners paid rent in respect of the case land up-to the year 2019 and obtained valid rent receipts thereof.

Surprisingly, the Additional Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar(Opposite Party No.5) as per order dated 03.02.2020 recalled the previous order for fixation of rent passed by the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar on dated 20.07.2019 in Revenue Misc. Case No.161 of 2016 and directed to record the case land in its previous status as it was prior to the order of settlement passed on dated 16.07.2019 in Revenue Misc. Case No.161 of 2016 in favour of the petitioners without issuing any notice to the petitioners and without giving any opportunity of being heard to the petitioners, though RoR of the case land by the time of the impugned order was in the names of the petitioners on the basis of the order passed by the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar on dated 16.07.2019 in Revenue Misc. Case No.161 of 2016.

For which, the petitioners filed this writ petition praying for quashing the impugned order dated 03.02.2020 passed in Revenue Misc. Case No.161 of 2016 by the Additional Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar(Opposite Party No.5) on the ground of non-compliance of the principles of natural justice.

3. Heard from the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the State.

4. It is well evident from the impugned order dated 03.02.2020(Annexure-8) passed by the Additional Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar(Opposite Party No.5) in Revenue Misc. Case No.161 of 2016 that, no opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioners for correction of the RoR of the case land from their names.

5. It is the settled propositions of law that, no order for correction of the RoR of any land like the case land from the name of the recorded person by any Court or authority can be passed without issuing notice to the said person or persons in whose name or names RoR stand and without giving opportunity of being heard to the said recorded tenants/persons thereof. Because, the persons, whose interest are likely to be affected through any order, the said persons should be given opportunity of being heard. If any order is passed for correction of RoR from the names of the recorded tenants/persons without giving any opportunity to them for correction of RoR from their names, the said order shall be deemed as an order without compliance of the principles of natural justice.

6. When the impugned order dated 03.02.2020(Annexure-8) in Revenue Misc. Case No.161 of 2016 has been passed by the Additional Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar(Opposite Party No.5) without complying the principles of natural justice, then at this juncture, the said impugned order vide Annexure-8 passed by the Opposite Party No.5 cannot