Ananda Chandra Behera, J
1. This writ petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the petitioner praying for quashing the impugned order dated 05.10.2022 (Annexure-1 series) passed in Appeal Case No.843 of 2014 by the Addl. Sub-Collector-cum-Addl. Settlement Officer, Bhubaneswar (Opp. Party No.3).
2. It appears from the order sheets vide Annexure-1 that, the Appeal Case No.843 of 2014 was heard by the Settlement Officer, Cuttack and thereafter, the same was transferred to the Opp. Party No.3, but the Opp. Party No.3 without hearing from the parties passed the impugned order on dated 05.10.2022 rejecting the Appeal Case No.843 of 2014 of the petitioner reflecting therein, the appeal was heard by the Settlement Officer. For which, the petitioner challenged the impugned order by filing this writ petition praying for quashing the same.
3. I have already heard from the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State.
4. The law on this aspect has already been clarified by the Apex Court in the ratio of the following decisions:
In a case between Gullapalli Nageswara Rao and Others Vs. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport and Another reported in AIR 1959 (SC) 308 and Surendra Singh & Others Vs. State of U.P. reported in AIR 1954 (SC) 194 that, if one person hears the parties and another person decides the case, then, such decision is against the basic principles of judicial procedure and natural justice.
Here in this matter at hand, the impugned order under challenge has been passed by the Add. Sub-Collector, Bhubaneswar without hearing from the parties but on the basis of the hearing by the Settlement Officer. For which, it is held that, the impugned order has been passed by the Opp. Party No.3 in violation of the principles of natural justice.
5. When it is held that, the impugned order has been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, then, at this juncture, by applying the principles of law enunciated by the Apex Court in the ratio of the above decision to the impugned order dated 05.10.2022 passed in Appeal Case No.843 of 2014 by the Opp. Party No.3, it is held that, the impugned order dated 05.10.2022 passed in Appeal Case No.843 of 2014 by the Opp. Party No.3 is not sustainable under law, then, at this juncture, the same is liable to be quashed.
As such, there is merit in the writ petition filed by the petitioner. The same is to be allowed.
6. In result, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed.
7. The impugned order dated 05.10.2022 passed in Appeal Case No.843 of 2014 by the Opp. Party No.3 is quashed/set aside.
The matter vide Appeal Case No.843 of 2014 is remitted back to the Settlement Officer, Jobra, Cuttack to decide the same afresh as per law after giving opportunity of being heard to the parties thereof and the Settlement Officer, Jobra, Cuttack shall dispose of the Appeal Case No.843 of 2014 within a period of one month from the date of appearance of the petitioner before the Settlement Officer, Jobra, Cuttack.
8. The petitioner is directed to appear before the Settlement Officer, Jobra, Cuttack in Appeal Case No.843 of 2014 on dated 23.12.2025 and to file the certified copy of this Judgment for the purpose of receiving the directions of the Appeal Case No.843 of 2014 as to further proceeding of the Appeal Case No.843 of 2014.
9. As such, this writ petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of finally.
