IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.10114 of 2026 Balakrishna Panda ..... Petitioner Represented by Mr.P.K.Nanda, Adv -versus-

State of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties Represented by A.G.A.

CORAM:

JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA

ORDER

Order No. 10.4.2026.

06. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned Addl.

Government Advocate for the State.

3. The Petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayer;

“It is, therefore, humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court

may graciously be pleased to issue Rule Nisi calling upon

the 0pp. Parties to show cause as to why a writ in the

nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ(s) shall

not be issued to direct the Opposite Parties to correct the

area from Ac. 0.044 to 0.074 decimals in Khata No. 341, Plot No. 267/3407 in Mouza- Bhubaneswar Sahar Unit No.16, Jaydev Vihar under Bhubaneswar Tahasil within stipulated period as per the ROR published by the Settlement Authority and further be pleased to direct the Government authorities to pay compensation for the latches and on perusal of the causes so shown or insufficient causes shown to make the said rule absolute may pass such other order/orders as deemed just and proper;

And for this act of kindness the petitioner shall as in duty bound, ever pray.”

4. The case of the Petitioner, briefly stated, is that after settlement operation, the case land was recorded in his favour as per ROR finally published on 22.10.1992 mentioning an area of Ac.0.074 decs. This possession continued for long time till another ROR was published by the Tahasildar, wherein the extent of the land has been reduced to Ac.0.044 decs. There is no endorsement in the ROR as to on what basis the extent of area was reduced. It is the specific case of the Petitioner that the area mentioned in the subsequent ROR is not in consonance with the ROR published by the settlement authorities. It is submitted by learned counsel for the Petitioner that highlighting such grievance, the Petitioner has already approached the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar (Opposite Party No.4) by submitting a grievance petition, which was registered as Grievance No.1405/2024.

5. Learned State counsel submits that the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar has power under Rule 34 to deal with such application seeking correction of the ROR.

6. The Writ Petition is therefore, disposed of directing the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar to consider the aforementioned grievance petition in accordance with law as early as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order by the Petitioner.

7. It goes without saying that the Petitioner shall be granted opportunity of hearing before disposal of the grievance petition. 8. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

(Sashikanta Mishra)

Judge AKB Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed

Signed by: ASHOK KUMAR BEHERA

Reason: Authentication

Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack

Date: 10-Apr-2026 18:55:43