Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

th 7 April, 2026 SASHIKANTA MISHRA, J. The petitioners seek to challenge the order dated 07.01.2026 passed in Revenue Misc. Appeal Case No.07/2025, whereby the Sub-Collector, Dhenkanal rejected the petition filed for grant of leave to prefer appeal, arising out of Revenue Misc. Case No.695/2025, as well as the consequential order dated 15.12.2025 passed by the Tahasildar, Dhenkanal in the said RMC Case, pursuant to the order dated 19.11.2025 passed in Mutation Appeal No.38/2025 by the Sub-Collector, Dhenkanal. The petitioners have further assailed the eviction notice dated 26.12.2025 issued by the Opposite Party No.3.

While the matter stood thus, the petitioner was served with a notice dated 26.12.2025 issued by the Opposite Party No.3 directing her to vacate the land on the ground that the same forms part of Railway land. On receipt of the said notice, the petitioner made enquiries and came to know that her recorded land had been taken away from her khata and merged with Khata No.112 standing in the name of the Railway authorities pursuant to the order dated 19.11.2025 passed in Mutation Appeal No.38/2025 and the consequential order dated 15.12.2025 passed in RMC Case No.695/2025.

It is stated that upon detection of such irregularity during verification of records, the Railway authorities preferred Mutation Appeal No.38/2025 before the Sub-Collector, Dhenkanal, who, upon consideration of the materials on record, set aside the said mutation and directed restoration of the land to the original Khata No.112. Consequent thereto, the Tahasildar, Dhenkanal initiated RMC Case No.695/2025 and corrected the ROR in terms of the appellate order.

9. Mr. S.N Patnaik supports the argument made by the Mr. Parhi and submits that the mutation in favour of Arun Shankar Ghosh having been found to be erroneous and without jurisdiction, the appellate authority has rightly exercised its power in setting aside the same. He submits that the Tahasildar has only carried out the consequential correction of the ROR in obedience to the appellate order.

10. From the facts of the case and the rival contentions, it is evident that order dated 19.11.2025 passed by the Sub-Collector, Dhenkanal in Mutation Appeal No.38 of 2025, order dated 15.12.2025 passed by the Tahasildar, Dhenkanal in RMC No.695 of 2025 and order dated 07.01.2026 passed by the Sub-Collector in RMAC No.7 of 2026 are under challenge. Order dated 15.12.2025, passed by the Tahasildar in RMC No.695 of 2025 is a consequential order passed on the basis of order dated 19.11.2025 passed in Mutation Appeal No.38 of 2025.