Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No. 7468 of 2013 CNR No. ODHC010033312013 Damodar Prasad Mohanty ..... Petitioner Mr. S.C. Dash, Advocate -versus- Secretary, CDA & Anr. ..... Opposite Parties Mr. D. Mohapatra, Sr. Advocate (Opp. Party No. 1) Mr. D.K. Mohanty, Advocate (Opp. Party No. 2) CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER 29.08.2026 Order No. 17 I.A. No. 16406 of 2026 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties. 3. This application has filed seeking substitution of the deceased Petitioner. 4. Considering the grounds taken, the prayer stands allowed. 5. Legal heirs of the deceased Petitioner be substituted as Petitioner Nos. 1 to 4. Consolidated cause title with the relevant pages so filed in Court be placed in the appropriate place. 6. I.A. accordingly stands disposed of. (BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge 18. I.A. Nos. 3469 of 2023 & 16247 of 2026 1. Heard. Page 2 of 3. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that he does not want to press both the I.As. 3. Accordingly, both the I.As. stand dismissed as not pressed. (BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge 19. I.A. No. 16249 of 2026 1. Heard. 2. Considering the grounds taken, the prayer stands allowed. 3. Petitioner is permitted to correct the description of Opp. Party No. 2 as TPCODL in Court. 4. I.A. accordingly stands disposed of. (BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge 20. W.P.(C) No. 7468 of 2013 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the Opp. Parties. Consolidated cause title along with the relevant pages is served on the learned counsel appearing for Opp. Party Nos. 2 & 3 in Court. 2. Petitioner has filed the present writ petition inter alia with the following prayer:- “Therefore the petitioner most fervently prays that Rule Nisi be issued to the opposite parties to show-cause and after hearing, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue: Page 3 of 3. (i) Writ of mandamus to take consequential steps by opposite party No 2 to remove the sub-station. (ii) Writ of mandamus to opposite party No 1 to demolish the sub-station within two weeks of the order made by this Hon'ble Court. (iii) To issue other writ or order as necessary and proper to provide relief to the petitioner in the interest of justice. And for which act of kindness the petitioner shall ever pray.” 3. However, taking into account the claim raised in the present Writ Petition, liberty is granted to the Petitioner to make a fresh representation before Opp. Party No. 2 by enclosing all the relevant documents and citations in support of his claim, if any, within a period of three (3) weeks hence. 4. It is observed that if such representation is filed within the aforesaid time period, Opp. Party No. 2 shall do well to take a lawful decision on the same within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of such representation. The order so passed by Opp. Party No. 2 be communicated to the Petitioner. 5. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. (BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge Sneha