p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.2025 of 2026 Susanta Kumar Senapati …. Petitioner Represented by Adv.– Mr. P.K. Rath, Senior Advocate Mr. S.K. Behera, Advocate -Versus- State of Odisha and Others …. Opposite Parties Represented by Adv.– Ms. A. Dash, Addl. Standing Counsel CORAM: HON’ BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN Order No. ORDER 22.01.2026 01. 1. The challenge is made to the communication dated 24th December, 2025 issued by the Tahasildar, Sheragada in the district of Ganjam solely on the premise that the said authority is not a competent authority to take a decision in terms of the provisions contained in the Odisha Excise Rules, 2017. 2. Undeniably, the petitioner holds an existing IMFL Off Shop license and subsequently, he applied for shifting of the said shop to another place. 3. On the basis of the said application, the Inspector of Excise, Aska Range, Ganjam issued a letter dated 16.12.2025 to the Tahasildar, Sheragada in the district of Ganjam to make an inquiry and verify the ownership of the land with the radial distance of the objectionable site from the proposed land. Five informations were sought in the said letter p. 2 namely, names of the recorded tenant, names of the boundary tenant, status of the land, kissam of the land and whether the Government land is encroached. Instead of giving reply as indicated in the said letter, the Tahasildar, Sheragada of its own invited the objection and took up the responsibilities of the concerned authority and took a decision that the said proposed site is not suitable for opening of the IMFL OFF Shop. 4. Rule 31 of the Odisha Excise Rules, 2017 postulates the affixation of the public notice both in Odia and English in the prescribed form in terms of sub-section (1) of Section 20 and Section 38(a) of the Odisha Excise Act, 2008 giving 15 days time for receiving objections, if any. In addition to the same, the proclamation shall also be made in the locality by beat of drums or by an announcement in public or by hosting of the notice in the concerned district website. All such exercise is required to be undertaken by the Collector and the power is not vested upon the Tahasildar, Sheragada in the said statutory provisions. 5. It is trite law that the authorities cannot do anything unless conferred by law as any action transgressing the boundaries setforth in this regard or in absence of any such power having conferred in the statute, the action is susceptible to be interfered with. The authority cannot use of the power of a statutory authority provided in the statute in taking a decision and disposing of the case. Usurpation of the power by an authority lacking jurisdiction and/or the power is always regarded as a colourable exercise of power and, therefore, there is no impediment or fetter put in the writ Court to strike down the same. Since the Tahasildar is not a competent authority under Rule 31 of the said Rules, 2017 for inviting an objection from public, the entire exercise of inviting an objection by the Tahasildar is blatantly violative of Rule p. 3 31(a) of the said Rules. The portion of the order by which the Tahasildar has invited the objection and took a decision that the proposed site is not suitable for opening of the IMFL OFF Shop is hereby quashed and set aside. The Inspector of Excise, Aska Range is directed to proceed on the basis of the information which was furnished along with the said decision as permissible in law. 6. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. (Harish Tandon) Chief Justice (M.S. Raman) Judge S.K. Jena/Secy. Designation: SECRETARY Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack.