IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

WP(C) No. 9511 of 2021

(An application under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India)

***

Sri Laxmi N rusingha Mahapravu,

Bije at Old Berhampur (Khaspa

Street) represented through;

1. Rahul Das

2. Krushna Chandra Choudhury

3. Chitiasen Mohapatra

4. Chandrasekhar Bhuyan

5. Pramod Kumar Sahu

6. Susanta Behera

7. Narayan Mohapatra ….

Petitioners

-Versus-

1. State of Odisha, represente d

through Ministry of Law,

Odisha, Bhubaneswar

2. Commissioner of Endowments,

Odisha, Bhubaneswar

3. Iswar Das

…. Opposite Parties

4. Santosh Kumar Panigrahi

Advocates appeared:

For Petitioners : Mr. Satyabadi Mantry, Advocate

For Opposite Parties : Mr. Ajodhya Ranjan Dash

Additional Government Advocate

(For Opp. Party No.1)

Mr. Amit Kumar Nath, Advocate

(For Opp. Party No.2)

Ms. Deepali Mahapatra, Advocate

(For Opp. Party No.3)

CORAM:

MR. JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA ------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------

Heard and disposed of on : 16.01.2026 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

J U D G M E N T

By the Bench:

1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2. Petitioners in this writ application seek to assail the order dated 01.03.2019 (Annexure-2) passed by the State Government in Appeal No.04 of 2018. The Petitioners also pray for setting aside the impugned sale deed under Annexure- 5 holding it to be invalid and void and also pray for other consequential relief.

3. Mr. Mantry, learned Counsel for the Petitioners submit that learned Commissioner of Endowments pursuant to an application under Section 19 of Orissa Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1951 (for brevity ‘the Act’) in O.A. No. 164 of 2015 made by the trustee of Sri Laxmi Nrusingha Mahapravu Bije, Berhampur vide his order dated 08.02.2018 refused to grant permission to alienate the immovable property of the said Deity.

4. It is submitted that while adjudicating the matter, learned Commissioner raised doubt as to whether Sri Laxmi Nrusingha Mahapravu Bije, Old Berhampur and Sri Nrusingha Swami Bije, Puruna Berhampur, Patarasahi are one and the same Deity or not. However, the trustee being aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Endowments refusing permission to alienate the deity’s immovable property preferred an Appeal under Section 19(4)

of the Act.

5. The State Government relying upon the report of the concerned Inspector of Endowments as well as report of the Additional Assistant Commissioner of Endowments, Berhampur holding that Sri Laxmi Nursingh Mahaprabhu and Sri Nrusingha Swami are one and the same Deity granted permission to alienate the immovable property of the Deity vide order under Annexure-2. The said order is assailed in this writ petition.

6. Mr. Mantry, learned Counsel for the Petitioners further submits that mandatory procedure under Rule 4(2) of the Odisha Hindu Religious Endowment Rules, 1959 (for brevity ‘the Rules’) was not followed while alienating the property of the Deity. Hence, the auction notice as well as the sale deed executed pursuant to the said order is vitiated and are liable to be struck down and sale deed is invalid and confers no right, title and interest on the purchaser. He, therefore, prays for setting aside the order under Annexure 2 and sale deed under annexure 5.

7. Ms. Mohapatra, learned Counsel appearing for the Trustee-Opposite Party No.3 relying upon the order passed in O.A. No.4 of 1993 filed under Section 41 of the Act submitted that Iswar Das was recognised as the hereditary trustee of Sri Laxmi Nrusingha Mahapravu Bije, Old Berhampur, Khaspa Street. She also drew attention to Letter No.1260/666 G(M) dated 27.09.2018, wherein the Additional Assistant Commissioner of Endowments, Berhampur stated that Sri Laxmi Nrusingha Mahapravu and Sri Laxmi Nrusingha Swami, Khaspa Street, Berhampur are one and same Deity.

8. In view of the aforesaid controversy, this Court vide order dated 21.08.2025 directed learned Commissione