IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 6923 of 2026 Debendra Naik …. Petitioner(s) Mr. G. Sahu, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and others …. Opp. Party(s) Mr. D. Mohanty, AGA CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA Order No. ORDER 01.05.2026 01. 1. Heard. 2. The petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court making the following prayer:- “It is therefore prayed that the Writ Petition be admitted, relevant records be called for and after hearing the counsel for the parties, the Writ Petition be allowed declaring and holding that the newly formed Watershed Committee (WC) as per Annexure-1 to be void and further to direct the Opp. Parties to form Watershed Committee (WC) in Tendapadar GP afresh after affording opportunity of hearing to all concern in accordance with law with in a stipulated period as deem just and proper by this Hon'ble Court.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner along with the other villagers are aggrieved by the formation of the Watershed Committee by the opposite party no.2. He further submits that the petitioner along with other villagers having similar grievance have submitted a representation dated 25.09.2025 to the opposite party no.3, which is pending. 4. Mr. D. Mohanty, learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State submits that there was a meeting preceding formation of the committee and in the said meeting the villagers and pachayat members were present and on the basis of the decision taken in the meeting, the committee has been formed. 5. Annexure-2 attached to the petition indicates that apart from the members of the Panchayat, hundreds of villagers had participated in the meeting and they have also put their signature in the resolution. The subsequent representation given by the petitioner along with the other villagers appears to be an afterthought and the petitioner alone has approached this Court and there is no authorization given by any other villagers to the petitioner for the purpose of approaching this Court. Essentially the prayer of the writ indicates that it’s a public interest litigation. Therefore, there is no cause of action arises in favour of the petitioner and there is no enforceable right subsists in favour of the petitioner to maintain the writ petition. 6. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of. (S.S. Mishra) Judge Ashok MOHAPATRA