p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.17681 of 2026 Deepak Kumar Swain …. Petitioner Mr. Pramoda Kumar Mishra, Advocate -versus- Settlement Officer, Major Settlement Office and another …. Opposite Parties Mr. Kailash Chandra Kar, Government Advocate CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN Order No. ORDER 14.07.2026 01. 1. The petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing this writ petition invoking provision under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India with the following prayer(s):- “Therefore, it is prayed that your Lordship’s would graciously be pleased to admit the case, issue notice and after hearing the parties be pleased to allow this petition directing the opp. parties to accept the memorandum of appeal, under Annexure-1 and dispose of the same as per U/s.22(2) of the Orissa Survey and Settlement Act. And may pass any other order(s) as this Hon’ble Court deem fit and proper. And for which act of kindness the petitioner shall as in duty bound ever pray.” 2. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner purchased the land situated in the District: Khordha, Tahasil: Bhubaneswar, P.S.: Chandaka, Mouza: Sampur, Hal Khata No.175, Plot No.74, Area Ac.0.080 decimal out of total area Ac.8.000 dec., p. 2 (corresponding to Sabik Khata No.224/1, Plot No.74/1399) from one Utara Rath by executing registered sale deed bearing No.1935, dated 5th July, 1995. During Hal settlement, since the petitioner and his family were out of station, notice being not received, the petitioner has been denied opportunity to present his case. As a consequence thereto the said land was recorded in the name of Bhagirathi Nanda, Radhamadhab Nanda, Padmalava Nanda. 2.1. On coming know about such fact, he approached the learned Settlement Officer, Major Settlement Office, Jobra, Cuttack by submitting the memorandum of appeal, but the authority concerned refused to receive the memorandum of appeal without assigning any reason. 2.2. Hence, this writ petition. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that in an identical fact situation, this Court has rendered a judgment on 17th November, 2025 in the case of Sanjeeb Kumar Ghosh Vs. Assistant Settlement Officer, Major Settlement Office, Jobra, Cuttack and another, WP(C) No.23773 of 2025, wherein this Court directed the said authority to receive the application filed by the petitioner. 4. In course hearing the learned Additional Standing Counsel, appearing for opposite parties having given opportunity to peruse the said judgment, submitted that the instant matter is governed by the aforesaid judgment. p. 3 5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-opposite parties. 6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, this Court disposes of this writ petition with the directions as contained in the judgment dated 17th November, 2025 passed in Sanjeeb Kumar Ghosh (supra). (M.S. Raman) Judge Pradeep