p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.18374 of 2026 CORAM: JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA ORDER 24.06.2026 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. 3. The petitioners have approached this Court with the following prayer:- “It is therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue Rule NISI in the nature of mandamus calling upon the Opp.Parties more particularly the Opp.Party no.3 to show cause as to why he shall not be directed to dispose of/ complete the demarcation of the land pertaining to Khata No. 2870/2595, Plot No. 6271, Mouza- Andharua, within a stipulated time; And in the event the opp. Parties more particularly opp.party no.3 fails to show cause or shows insufficient cause the said rule be made absolute and the said opp.party no-3 be directed to dispose of/ complete the demarcation of the land Basanti Pradhan & Another .… Petitioners Represented by Mr. S.Dash, Advocate -Versus- State of Odisha & Others .… Opp. Parties Represented by Mr. A.R.Dash, Additional Government Advocate Order No. 01. . p. 2 pertaining to Khata No. 2870/2595, Plot No. 6271, Mouza- Andharua, within a stipulated time; And may further be pleased to pass any other order/orders, direction/directions, writ/writs as deem fit and proper; And for this act of your kindness, the petitioners as in duty bound shall ever pray.” 4. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and on going through the records, it appears that Demarcation Case No.880 of 2023 was initiated on the basis of application submitted by the petitioners. In the said proceeding, the demarcation was scheduled on 08.01.2024 after issuance of notice to all boundary tenants. On the same day, the private Opposite Parties 5 to 7 raised an objection claiming that a civil suit concerning the same land is pending and therefore the land ought not to be measured/demarcated. 5. Mr. S.Dash, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that mere pendency of a civil suit without any prohibitory order being passed therein cannot stop the demarcation from being conducted. 6. Mr. A.R.Dash, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that there is no order of stay of any kind in the present case to prohibit demarcation. 7. This Court, after hearing learned counsel for the parties is of the view that there being no prohibitory order passed by the Civil Court, there is no legal impediment in proceeding with the demarcation. 8. The writ application is therefore, disposed of directing the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar to continue with the demarcation as p. 3 proposed in accordance with law but only after granting an opportunity of hearing to all concerned. (Sashikanta Mishra) Judge AKB