IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.10812 of 2026 M/S. Madhab Engineering Works, Mayurbhanj and Anr. …. Petitioners Represented by Adv.- Mr. N. Lenka, Adv. -versus- Collector and District Magistrate, Mayurbhanj and Ors. …. Opposite Parties Represented by Adv.- CORAM: JUSTICE KRISHNA SHRIPAD DIXIT JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH ORDER 21.04.2026 Petitioner, who admittedly is a loanee, is knocking at the doors of the Writ Court with the following prayer: “It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court would graciously be pleased to admit the writ petition, issue Rule NISI in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other writ/writs as deem fit and proper calling upon the Opp. Parties to show cause as to why the order dtd. 12.09.2025 passed by the Collector-Cum-District, Magistrate, Mayurbhanj vide annexure-22 and all actions pursuant thereto shall not be quashed, why IA No. 1705/2025 and 284/2026 vide annexure-18 and 21 respectively shall not be disposed of by the learned DRT within a particular period and till then why the Opp. Party bank shall not be prevented from taking possession Order No. 01. of the mortgage property i.e Plot No.144/1114 under Khata No. 167/654 area Ac0.040 decimal situated at Vill-Khetrapal, Tulasichaura, Tahasil-Baripada, Dist-Mayurbhanj till disposal of said SA No. 109/2023.” 2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner argues that his client’s two applications i.e. I.A. No.1705 of 2025 & I.A. No.284 of 2026 filed in S.A. No.109 of 2023 are not being taken up for immediate consideration despite urgement of urgency grounds and therefore, this Court should intervene. He also tells us that right to speedy remedy is one of the facets under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. He highlights the adverse consequence if the subject applications are kept pending long. 3. Regard being had to the innocuous nature of the prayer and also that the other side would have opportunity of opposing the subject applications before the DRT, notice to Opposite Parties is dispensed with. 4. Agreeing with the submission of learned counsel for the Petitioner, we dispose off this petition requesting the DRT, Cuttack to take up subject applications of the Petitioner on a war footing so that no prejudice would be caused to him in view of Section 14 order dated 12.09.2025 passed by the Collector & District Magistrate, Mayurbhanj. In that connection all contentions are kept open. 5. Registry to send a copy of this order to the Opposite Parties by speed post, who may seek recall of this order if grounds do exist therefor, since this order has been made ex parte. This order will not come in the way of Petitioner seeking any reprieve at the hands of the DRT by offering reasonable sum of money to the appropriation of loan account. Web copy of order to be acted upon by all concerned. (Krishna Shripad Dixit) Judge (Chittaranjan Dash) Judge Prasant