Orissa High Court
WP(C)/19377/2026 of JAGAMOHAN PRADHAN Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 7 July 2026
of 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) NO.19377 OF 2026 Jagamohan Pradhan …. Petitioner Mr. Priyaranjan Swain, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and others …. Opp. Parties Mr. Siba Narayan Biswal, Additional Standing Counsel CORAM: JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA JUSTICE SANJAY
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) NO.19377 OF 2026
Jagamohan Pradhan
….
Petitioner
Mr. Priyaranjan Swain, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others
….
Opp. Parties
Mr. Siba Narayan Biswal,
Additional Standing Counsel
CORAM:
JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Order No. 07.07.2026
02.
1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Petitioner in this writ petition prays for the following reliefs:
It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit the writ petition, call for the records and issue "Rule NISI' in the nature of a writ of mandamus/ certitiorari or any other writ(s) calling upon the Opposite Parties to show cause as to why the impugned order dated 27.03.2025 passed by the Collector & District Magistrate, Angul, in Misc Case No. 71/2024 under Annexure-7 shall not be set aside/quashed and if the opposite parties fail to show-cause or show insufficient cause to make the said rule absolute in the interest of justice; And further be pleased to direct the Opposite Party Authorities more particularly Opposite Party No.1 & 2 to extend and calculate all Rehabilitation and Resettlement (R&R) benefits/entitlements to the Petitioner under the statutory mandates of the RFCTLAR&R Act, 2013, along with statutory interest from the date it became due in the interest of justice;
3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner in course of arguments submits that an exhaustive amendment of the writ petition is necessary. Hence, he prays for withdrawal of the writ petition seeking liberty to file a fresh one with better particulars. In support of his submission, he files a memo, which is taken on record.
4. Mr. Biswal, learned Additional Standing Counsel does not have any objection to such prayer.
5. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn with liberty to the Petitioner to file a fresh writ petition within one month hence.
(K.R. Mohapatra)
Judge
(S.K. Mishra)
Banita
Judge Digitally Signed Signed by: BANITA PRIYADARSHINI PALEI Designation: SR. STENOGRAPHER Reason: AUHENTICATION Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 08-Jul-2026 16:35:57 Signature Not Verified