MRUTUNJAY Vs. COMMISSIONER OF ENDOWMENTS, BBSR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Dash, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, his client's representation dtd. 10/6/2022 remains pending for consideration by the Commissioner. His client sought updating Pali Register on inserting his client's name. He relies on judgment of the Supreme Court in Angurbala Mullick vs. Debabrata Mullick, reported in AIR, 1951 SC 293. He submits, there be direction upon the Commissioner to consider his client's representation, in accordance with annexures-1 and 4.

(2.) Ms. Naidu, learned advocate appears on behalf of the Commissioner and submits, the consideration to be made will require necessity of hearing all parties concerned.

(3.) Opposite party nos.2 or 3, as having the power under sec. 8 in Odisha Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1951, is directed to consider and deal with said representation dtd. 10/6/2022. For the purpose concerned parties may be given hearing. Decision on the consideration be made known to petitioner, within three weeks of communication. Petitioner will communicate this order along with copy of said representation dtd. 10/6/2022 to the Commissioner.