CUTTACK: The Odisha High Court has held that a tehsildar cannot override or deviate from an order passed by a superior revisional authority on merits, directing the Pipili tehsildar to implement a 2022 order of the commissioner of consolidation, within 15 days.
Justice Sashikanta Mishra, hearing a petition filed by Jayaram Jena, set aside the tehsildar’s April 22, 2024 order by which the latter had refused to carry out the commissioner’s directions concerning correction of land records.
Jena had approached the HC seeking recording of 0.32 acre out of 0.67 acre in Plot No 316 under consolidation khata No 157 of Madhupur mouza in his name under a separate khata, along with correction of the records and map.
The dispute arose from a revision petition filed by Jena under section 37(1) of the Odisha Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation of Land Act. In revision case No. 299 of 2016, the commissioner of consolidation, Odisha had allowed his revision on February 25, 2022, and directed the tehsildar to make necessary corrections in the records and map within two months. As the order was not implemented, Jena approached the HC through successive proceedings, including two writ petitions, along with a contempt application. The tehsildar eventually rejected his request on April 22, 2024, citing his inability to implement the commissioner’s order.
Justice Mishra on August 10 ruled, “Once the revisional authority exercising power under section 37 of the OCH & PFL Act has rendered a decision on merits of the case, the tehsildar cannot deviate therefrom by referring to the provisions of the OGLS Act,” Justice Mishra observed. He further said it was “beyond the competence of the tehsildar to act in a manner contrary to the express direction issued by the revisional authority.” Holding that the impugned order could not be sustained, he quashed it and directed the Pipili tehsildar to carry out the commissioner’s directions without further delay and, in any event, within 15 days.
The state counsel conceded that a subordinate authority could not “overreach the direction of the superior authority”, though raising an objection over the delay in challenging the tehsildar’s order.