Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2025 DAILYLAW 5175 (ORI)

CHANDAN BINDHANI v. STATE OF ODISHA

WA/1374/2025 · 2026-02-11

Chittaranjan Dash, Dixit K S

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.A. No.1374 of 2025 Chandan Bindhani & Others …. Appellants Mr. S.K. Mishra, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha &Others …. Respondents Mr. S.B. Panda, AGA CORAM: JUSTICE KRISHNA SHRIPAD DIXIT JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH Order No. ORDER 11.02.2026 06. This Intra-Court Appeal is filed by a person who is not a party to the proceedings in W.P.(C) No.19980 of 2025, wherein the order has been passed by the learned Single Judge on 01.08.2025. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the Appellants vehemently argues that the order is passed against his clients without an opportunity of hearing and therefore, there is gross violation of principles of natural justice warranting interference of this Court. He also tells us that all the Appellants hold eligibility certificates granted by Executive Officer, Jaleswar Municipality and therefore, their occupation is not illegal. He also cites a decision of Apex court in Abhishek Gupta vs. Dinesh Kumara and Others, 2025 SCC Online SC 2739 to the effect that the appeal is maintainable and review is not an adequate remedy, regard being had to the constraint of writ jurisdiction. p. 2 3. Learned AGA appearing for the official Respondents and learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No.6, who happens to be the Writ Petitioner, oppose the appeal on the ground that still the Writ Petition is pending, and therefore it is open to the Appellants to seek impleadment and also recall of the order on the grounds that have been urged before this Court. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the Parties and having perused the appeal papers, we decline indulgence in the matter, inasmuch as the Appellants can seek redressal at the hands of the learned Single Judge before whom the subject Writ Petition is pends. In that connection, all contentions are kept open. The decision in Abhishek Gupta (supra) is not invokable, inasmuch as that was a case where the petition was finally disposed off and therefore review was held to be inadequate because of conventional constraints. However, in this case, petition is still pending. In the above circumstances, this appeal is disposed off with observations herein above made. Web copy of this order to be acted upon by all concerned. (Krishna Shripad Dixit) Judge (Chittaranjan Dash) Judge Bijay/Sarbani Designation: Junior Stenographer