Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2026 DAILYLAW 22129 (ORI)

DEBENDRANATH MOHANTY @ DEVANDRANATH MOHANTY v. STATE OF ODISHA

WP(C)/18626/2026 · 2026-06-24

Sashikanta Mishra

Writ Petition (Civil)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.18626 of 2026 CORAM: JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA ORDER 24.6.2026. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned Addl. Govt. Advocate for the State. 3. The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayer; “The petitioner, therefore, prayed that the Honourable Court be pleased to admit the writ application and after hearing from the petitioner's advocate issue a writ in nature of mandamus and issue any suitable writ/writs by directing the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar, accept the mutation application and record the name of the petitioner in the ROR in view of under Annexures-4 and 5 within a stipulated period.” 4. It is submitted that the Tahasildar is not accepting the application for mutation attempted to be presented physically by the petitioner. Debendranath Mohanty @ Devandranath Mohanty .… Petitioner Represented by Mr. B. Mohanty, Advocate -Versus- State of Odisha & Others .… Opp. Parties Represented by Mr. S.N.Patnaik, Additional Govt. Advocate Order No. 01. . p. 2 5. Since the applications are presently being accepted in online mode, the Writ Petition is disposed of leaving it open to the petitioner to submit an application before the competent authority in the online mode. It goes without saying that if such application is submitted, the same shall be considered in accordance with law. (Sashikanta Mishra) AKB Judge