SUDAM CHARAN BEHERA Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the petitioner praying for quashing the impugned order dtd. 23/6/2025(Annexure-2) passed in Mutation Case No.5714 of 2025 by the Tahasildar, Salipur(Opposite Party No.2) in the district of Cuttack on the ground of non-compliance of the principles of natural justice, because, said Mutation Case No.5714 of 2025 of the petitioner has been disposed of by the Tahasildar, Salipur(Opposite Party No.2) as per impugned order dtd. 23/6/2025 vide Annexure-2 without giving any opportunity of being heard to the petitioner assigning the reasons that, "the petitioner has purchased the case land from one of the co-sharers of his vendor without taking the consent of his other co-sharers."

(2.) Heard from the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State.

(3.) During the course of hearing of this writ petition, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State contended that, when, there is a statutory appellate forum to challenge the impugned order passed by the Tahasildar, Salipur(Opposite Party No.2) in Mutation Case No.5714 of 2025, by preferring an appeal before the Sub-collector, Cuttack, then, this writ petition filed by the petitioner is not entertainable under law. The law concerning the maintainability of a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 despite availability of an alternative remedy has already been clarified by the Apex Court in the ratio of the following decisions:-