IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.11249 of 2026 CORAM: JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA ORDER 23.04.2026 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 are aggrieved by order dated 20.02.2026 passed by the Sub-Collector, Bargarh in Mutation Appeal No.64 of 2025 filed by him. It is contended that the petitioner was not impleaded as a party in the mutation case but an order was passed recording his land in the name of the private Opposite Party even though, a civil suit is pending. When the order passed in the mutation case was produced in the civil suit, the petitioner, having come to know about the same filed the above mentioned appeal. 4. It is further contended that the appeal was dismissed on the ground of limitation but certain observations have been made on merits of the case. 5. This Court has already held in the case of Asutosh Mohapatra & Others Vrs. Sk. Manwar Alli & Others in (W.P.(C) No.24461 of 2026) that an order passed in mutation Bhama Sahy @ Purnima Sahu & Others .… Petitioners Represented by Mr. A.P. Bose, Advocate -Versus- State of Odisha & Others .… Opp. Parties Represented by Mr. S.N. Patnaik, Additional Government Advocate Order No. 01. . appeal can be revised by the Board of Revenue under Section 32 of the OSS Act. 6. Considering the above fact, the writ application is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioners to prefer revision within three weeks from today. If such revision is preferred along with application seeking appropriate interim relief, the revisional authority shall consider such application at the first instance before deciding the revision. 7. This Court further directs that operation of the order passed by the mutation authority as well as the appellate authority shall remain stayed for a period of three weeks. (Sashikanta Mishra) Judge Puspanjali Designation: Junior Stenographer Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack.