IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 35460 of 2025 Mathuram Ping …. Petitioner Mr. M.K. Chand, Advocate -versus- 1. State of Orissa 2. The Commissioner, Sambalpur Municipal Corporation, Sambalpur …. Opposite Parties Mr. P.K. Ray, AGA CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH Order No. ORDER 17.02.2026 03. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. Perused the report of the Registry regarding valid service of notice on Opposite Party No.2. 3. Since there is no appearance on behalf of the said Opposite Party, this Court is constrained to proceed with the matter. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner in the present writ petition assails the order at Annexure-3 passed by the Opposite Party No.2-the Commissioner, Sambalpur Municipal Corporation, Sambalpur which reads as under:- “xxx xxx xxx Whereas, a requisition has been received from the IIC, Dhanupali Police Station dated 08.08.2025 reporting that illegal cow slaughter was conducted at the premises of Sri Abdul Gaffar, Sunapali; And whereas, upon verification, it has been confirmed that the act constitutes a violation of Section 562(1) of the Odisha Municipal Corporation Act, 2003, which imposes a complete ban on the slaughter of cow and cattle within Corporation limits; And whereas, Section 562(2) of the said Act empowers the Commissioner or any officer authorised by him to lake necessary enforcement action against such contraventions; Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred under the aforesaid provisions, the Enforcement Officer, along with Junior Enforcement Officer and the Enforcement Squad of Sambalpur Municipal Corporation, is hereby directed to seal the said premises today, in accordance with law, to prevent further illegal activity. This shall be treated as MOST URGENT. xxx xxx xxx 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner referring to the schematic arrangement of the Odisha Municipal Corporation Act, 2003 that ex- facie it is arbitrary exercise of jurisdiction not envisaged by the Odisha Municipal Corporation Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as “Act, 2003”). Hence, the same merits interference of this Court. 6. To fortify his submission, attention of this Court is drawn to the relevant provision i.e. Section 562 of the Act, 2003 which deals with the ban on cow and cattle slaughter, the same reads as under:- “562. Ban on cow or cattle slaughter or road side slaughter and penalty - (1) There shall be complete ban on slaughter of cow and cattle and road side slaughter of any animal in the Corporation area. (2) Whoever contravenes the provision of Sub-sec (1) shall be prosecuted by the Commissioner or by any officer authorized by him or by the Mayor, Deputy Mayor or Corporator or any Executive Magistrate or any police officer not below the rank of Sub- Inspector in the Corporation area.” 7. On a bare perusal of the same, it is seen that the same does not empower the Commissioner to pass the impugned order at Annexure-3. 8. This Court also perused the other provisions relating to prosecution under the Act, 2003 which are envisaged under Section 582(5) of the Act, 2003. 9. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that taking into account that the act entails penal action and since admittedly the house of the Petitioner has given on rent, the Petitioner cannot be held liable for the act committed. 10. In this context reliance is also placed on the order passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Sambalpur in C.M.A. Case No.309 of 2025 (G.R. Case No.1872 of 2025) which was instituted in connection with the FIR in Dhanupali P.S. Case No.260 of 2025. By order dated 10.11.2025, the prayer of the Petitioner under Section 503 of BNSS was not entertained inter alia on the ground that the house was sealed by Sambalpur Municipal Corporation. 11. On a conspectus of materials on record, this Court is persuaded to hold that prima facie the Opposite Party No.2-Sambalpur Municipal Corporation has no authority to effect seizure in the factual matrix of the case at hand. The writ petition is allowed. 12. Hence, the order at Annexure-3 passed by the Sambalpur Municipal Corporation, Sambalpur is hereby set aside. 13. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. (V. Narasingh) Judge Ayesha