BISWANATH MISHRAN 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 a direction to the Tahasildar, Satyabadi (Opp. Party No.3) for registration of his application filed on dtd. 4/1/2022 as a Mutation Case and to proceed with the same for its disposal as per law, because in spite of filing of the application (Original of Annexure-2 series) by the petitioner before the Tahasildar, Satyabadi (Opp. Party No.3), the Tahasildar, Satyabadi (Opp. Party No.3) is not registering his application i.e. original of Annexure-2 series as a Case, for which, the petitioner has filed this writ petition praying for directing Tahasildar, Satyabadi (Opp. Party No.3) for registration of his application i.e. original of Annexure-2 series as a Mutation Case and to dispose of the said Mutation Case as per law.

(2.) I have already heard from the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State.

(3.) The law in respect of registration of an application of a party by the Court or authority without sitting over the same has already been clarified in the ratio of the following decision: In a case between Sunil Kumar Yadav Vs. District Magistrate & Others reported in 2025 (3) Civ.C.C. (Allh.) 159 that, if any party files an application before any authority or Court, the said authority or Court cannot sit over that application, but to register the same as per law and to dispose of the same according to law. The said Court or authority cannot retain the same idle without acting upon that application or petition.