Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2026 DAILYLAW 3455 (ORI)

BRAJA KISHORE MOHARANA v. STATE OF ODISHA

WP(C)/9635/2026 · 2026-04-09

Ananda Chandra Behera

Writ Petition (Civil)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.9615 of 2026 Parbati Moharana ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. – Biswajit Nayak -versus- State Of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties Represented By Adv. - Mr.S.Nayak, ASC WP(C) No.9635 of 2026 Braja Kishore Moharana ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. – Biswajit Nayak -versus- State Of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties Represented By Adv. - Mr.S.Nayak, ASC CORAM: MR. JUSTICE ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA ORDER 09.04.2026 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Since, a common question has arisen in both these writ petitions, then, both these writ petitions are taken up together analogously for their final disposal through this common order. 3. Heard from the learned counsel for the Petitioners and the learned ASC for the State. 4. The Petitioners have filed these writ petitions praying for directing the O.P. Nos.2 and 3 (Collector, Cuttack and Civil Supplies Officer, Cuttack) for Page 2 of 3. extension of the period of their tokens relating to the selling of the procured paddy, as, the date of their selling given in their tokens have already been passed in the meanwhile, but, the date of purchase of the paddy by the Government is continuing due to extension of the period for purchasing the same. For which, under the above changed circumstances, the Petitioners have prayed for directing the O.P. Nos.2 and 3 for extension of the date of their tokens in selling their paddy to the Government through O.P. No.4. 5. As, in the meantime, the period of purchasing the paddy from the farmers including the Petitioners has been extended by the Government and the said extension period is continuing as per the submissions of the learned counsel for the Petitioners, then, taking the present condition of the farmers (Petitioners) into account as well as on humanitarian ground, I find no justification to disallow these writ petitions filed by the Petitioners, as, the Petitioners have filed these writ petitions for no other reason, but, only in order to sell their procured paddy for their livelihood and to meet their expenditures incurred by them in their cultivation. 6. Therefore, both the writ petitions filed by the Petitioners are allowed. 7. The O.P. Nos.2 and 3 (Collector, Cuttack and Civil Supplies Officer, Cuttack) are jointly and severally directed to extend the period of their token in purchasing the amount of paddy indicated in their Page 3 of 3. respective tokens without causing any inconvenience and harassment to them (Petitioners) in any manner and shall take effective steps relating to the directions given in this order on the very date of production of certified copy of this order before them, if they (Petitioners) approach O.P. No3 during the extended period. 8. As such, both the writ petitions are disposed of finally. 9. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted to the Petitioners in course of the day on proper application. ( ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA) Judge Binayak