SANIA PUJARI Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The impugned orders of the learned Single Judge declines to interfere with the order of the Tahasildar, Mathili challenged in the Writ Petitions inter alia on the ground that the Appellants have adequate efficacious remedy of revision before the Commissioner under Sec. 15(b) of Orissa Survey and Settlement Act (OSS Act).

(2.) Learned counsel for the Appellants sought to suggest that such remedy is not available in view of the fact that earlier writ petition has been filed which was disposed of by learned Single Judge pursuant to which the Tahasildar had passed the impugned order. A perusal of that order of learned Single Judge reveals that there was no occasion to discuss Sec. 15(b) of OSS Act. The matter had been simply relegated to the Tahasildar to decide the issue.

(3.) Having heard learned counsel for the parties, the Court is not persuaded that the learned Single Judge has committed any error in relegating the Appellants to the remedy under Sec. 15(b) of the OSS Act. Consequently, there are no grounds made out for interference.