Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2026 DAILYLAW 9722 (ORI)

SUNIL KUMAR RATH v. STATE OF ODISHA

WP(C)/1750/2026 · 2026-02-17

Biraja Prasanna Satapathy

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C ) No.1750 of 2026 Sunil Kumar Rath & Another …. Petitioners Mr. H.D. Mohapatra, Adv. -versus- State of Odisha & Others …. Opposite Parties Mr. C.K. Pradhan, AGA COROM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No ORDER 17.02.2026 1. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer: In the view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue writ of mandamus or any form of writ/writs issuing Rule NISI calling upon the opposite parties particularly to the Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Odisha, Bhubaneswar - Opposite Party No.2 to show cause as to why direction shall not be issued to the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Odisha, Bhubaneswar to take appropriate steps immediately to shift the office of Haripur PACS Ltd. from the village- Bhanpur to its registered official address i.e. At/PO- Haripur in Haripur Grama Panchayat forthwith, considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, and If the Opposite Parties do not show cause or show insufficient cause, the Rule NISI may be made absolute; And pass any other order/orders, direction/directions, writ/writs as this Hon'ble deem fit and proper, And for this act of kindness the petitioners as in duty bound shall ever pray. p. 2 p. 2 4. It is contended that on the face of the letter issued under Annexure-2, Opp. party No.5 is not complying the direction and thereby causing prejudice to the Petitioners and other members of the Society. 5. Learned Add. Govt. Advocate on the other hand contended that if direction contained in letter dt.01.12.2025 under Annexure-2 is not being carried out by Opp. party No.5, let the Petitioners bring the same to the notice of Opp. Party No.4 for compliance. 6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and considering the submission made and the fact that already direction is there under Anenxure-2 on the Society, this Court permits the Petitioners to move Opp. party No.4 for compliance of the said direction. 7. It is observed that if such a representation will be filed within a period of 2(two) weeks, Opp. Party No. 4 shall do well to take a lawful decision on the same within a period of 4(four) weeks from the date of receipt of such representation. The order so passed by Opp. Party No. 4 be communicated to the Petitioner. 8. The Writ Petition accordingly stands disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge sangita