IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.5254 of 2026 Sambal Joint Farming Co- operative Society Ltd., Bargarh …. Petitioner Mr. P.K. Rath, Sr.Adv. -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. …. Opp. Parties Mr. S.P. Das, ASC CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER 23.04.2026 6. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner produced copy of order dated 17.04.2026 so passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.1991 of 2018 in Court. The same be kept in record. 2.1. Basing on the order so passed in W.P.(C) No.1991 of 2018, it is contended that W.P.(C) No. 1991 of 2018 has been restored to its file. 3. Heard learned counsel for the Parties 4. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer. “The petitioner, therefore, prays that your Lordships would be graciously pleased to admit this writ petition, call for the records and after hearing the parties allow the same, issue writ/writs in the nature of certiorari/mandamus and/or any other further writ/direction, order or direction quashing and setting aside Order No. 3064 dated 29.10.2025 passed by the Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Bargarh Division, under Annexure-1 and direct the Opposite Parties to allow registration of the Petitioner's Society and to participate in Paddy Procurement in terms of the Policy issued by the Government from time to time. And for this act of kindness, the petitioner shall as in duty bound ever pray.” 4.1. It is contended that without following the principles of natural justice and without issuing any show cause, the impugned order under Annexure-1 has been passed by Opp. Party No.4. It is contended that since principle of natural justice has not been followed while passing the impugned order, the same is not sustainable in the eye of law. 5. Mr. S.P. Das, learned Addl. Standing Counsel on the other hand contended that if as contended principles of natural justice has not been followed, then Petitioner instead of approaching this Court should have moved Opp. Party No.4 for reconsideration of order dated 29.10.2025. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the Parties and considering the submission made, this Court while disposing of the Writ Petition permits the Petitioner to move a proper application for cancellation/recalling of order dated 29.10.2025. 6.1. It is observed that if any such application will be moved within a period of two (2) weeks hence, Opp. Party No. 4 shall do well to take a lawful decision on the same within a further period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of such application. The order so passed by Opp. Party No. 4 be communicated to the Petitioner. 7. Till a decision is taken as directed, no further action be taken in terms of Order dated 29.10.2025. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. (BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge Jyoti