January to March 2013 for PDF.pmd - Orissa High Court

Swearing-in-Ceremony of Hon'ble Shri Justice Chockalingam Nagappanas Chief Justice of Orissa High Court on 27.2.2013. His ExcellencyShri M.C.Bhandare, the Governor of Odisha administering the Oath to His Lordship

CHIEF JUSTICE’ RESIDENCECANTONMENT ROAD, CUTTACK 753 001Phone : (0671) 2507808 (Off.)2301703 (Res.)2301505 (Res.)Fax : 0671 - 2301703 (Res)0671 - 2508446 (Off)May 2, 2013C. NAGAPPAN,Chief JusticeMESSAGEThis is the 23rd issue of the Court News covering the quarter January- March, 2013 and it gives me immense pleasure to release the same.One day after my assuming the office of the Chief Justice, fifty-fivenewly recruited judicial officers were administered oath on February 28, 2013and inducted in the cadre of Civil Judge (Junior Division) of the State which willdefinitely go a long way in disposal of pending cases in subordinate judiciary.The Court News is undoubtedly a better way of communication with allstakeholders of the Judiciary.(C. Nagappan)

Swearing-in-Ceremony ofHon'ble Shri JusticeRaghubir Dashas Judge of Orissa HighCourt on 4.1.2013.Hon'ble Shri JusticePradip Kumar Mohanty,Acting Chief Justice,Orissa High Courtadministering the Oathto His LordshipInauguration of Court of Addl. District Judgeat Chatrapur on 23.02.2013by Hon’ble Justice Indrajit Mahanty, Judge, Orissa High CourtCelebration of Republic Dayin the High Court premises on 26.01.2013Editorial BoardHon’ble Shri Justice M.M. DasHon’ble Shri Justice I.MahantyHon’ble Shri Justice B.K.Patel

CONTENTS01. Names of Hon’ble the Chief Justice ... 2and Hon’ble Judges of Orissa High Court.02. Sanctioned Strength & Vacancies in Orissa High Court. ... 303. Institution, Disposal and Pendency of Cases in the High Court ... 3from 01.01.2013 to 31.03.201304. Sanctioned Strength & Vacancies in District & Subordinate Courts ... 305. Institution, Disposal and Pendency of Cases in ... 4District & Subordinate Courts from 01.01.2013 to 31.03.201306. Outlines of some recent Orissa High Court Judgments ... 1207. Major Events ... 3008. Infrastructural Development of the Judiciary ... 30during the Financial Year 2013-1409. E-courts Project in Orissa ... 3110. Activities of Orissa State Legal Services Authority ... 3211. Programmes attended by Hon’ble the Chief Justice & ... 33Hon’ble Judges of Orissa High Court at the NJA, Bhopal & other places.12. Activities of High Court Legal Services Committee ... 3313. Activities of Orissa Judicial Academy ... 34

2CourtNewsHON’BLE JUDGES OF THE ORISSA HIGH COURTHON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICEHon’ble Shri Justice CHOCKALINGAM NAGAPPAN, B.Sc.,M.L.*HON’BLE JUDGESHon’ble Shri Justice Pradip Kumar Mohanty, LL.B.Hon’ble Shri Justice Madan Mohan Das, M.A., LL.B.Hon’ble Shri Justice Indrajit Mahanty, LL.M.Hon’ble Kumari Justice Sanju Panda, B.A., LL.B.Hon’ble Shri Justice Biswanath Mahapatra, M.A., LL.B., PGDTL.Hon’ble Shri Justice Subhash Chandra Parija, LL.B.Hon’ble Shri Justice Bijaya Krishna Patel, M.A., LL.B.Hon’ble Shri Justice Bijaya Kumar Nayak, LL.M.Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, M.A., LL.B.Hon’ble Shri Justice Chitta Ranjan Dash, LL.M.Hon’ble Shri Justice Bira Kishore Misra, LL.B.Hon’ble Shri Justice Raghubir Dash, B.A., LL.B.***Elevation of Hon’ble Shri Justice Chockalingam Nagappanas Chief Justice of Orissa High CourtDate of appointment as Addl. Judge of Madras High Court : 27.09.2000Date of appointment as Permanent Judge of Madras High Court : 20.09.2002Elevated as Chief Justice of Orissa High Court : 27.02.2013**Appointment of Hon’ble Shri Justice Raghubir Dash,as Judge of Orissa High CourtDate of Birth : 14.02.1954Date of appointment as Judge of Orissa High Court : 04.01.2013

CourtNews3SANCTIONED STRENGTH & VACANCIES IN HIGH COURT(As on 31.3.2013)Sanctioned Strength Working Strength Vacancies17 + 5 * = 22 12 5 + 5* = 10INSTITUTION, DISPOSAL AND PENDENCY OF CASES IN THE HIGH COURT(From 1.1.2013 to 31.3.2013)MAIN CASES* Addl. JudgesPendency as on1.1.2013Institution duringthe periodTotal disposalduring the periodPendency as on31.3.2013Civil Criminal Civil Criminal Civil Criminal Civil Criminal151574 31902 9292 9615 4648 8091 156218 33426183476 18907 12739 189644MISC. CASESPendency as on1.1.2013Institution duringthe periodTotal disposalduring the periodPendency as on31.3.2013Civil Criminal Civil Criminal Civil Criminal Civil Criminal147828 1606 9075 2259 3364 1882 153539 1983149434 11334 5246 155522TOTAL NO. OF CIVIL & CRIMINAL CASES DURING THE PERIOD (From 1.1.2013 to 31.3.2013)CivilCriminalOpening Balance Institution Disposed of Pending299402 18367 8012 30975733508 11874 9973 354093329103024117985345166Sl. No.SANCTIONED STRENGTH & VACANCIES INDISTRICT AND SUBORDINATE COURTS (as on 31.3.2013)1. District Judge2. Sr. Civil Judge3. Civil JudgeName of the CadresCadreStrengthPresentStrengthVacancies138 108 30181 180 01279 264 155. Special Judicial Magistrates 18 11 076. Gram Nyayalayas 16 08 08Total 632 571 61

4CourtNewsSTATEMENT SHOWING INSTITUTION, DISPOSAL & PENDENCY OF CIVIL & CRIMINALCASES IN THE SUBORDINATE JUDICIARY OF THE STATE From 01.01.2013 to 31.03.2013Sl. No. Name of the JudgeshipOpening Balanceas on 01.01.2013Institutionduring theQuarterCIVIL SUITS CIVIL APPEALSDisposed ofduring theQuarterPendency as on31.03.2013Opening Balanceas on 01.01.2013Institution duringthe QuarterDisposed ofduring theQuarterPendency a31.03.2011 Balasore 11790 1007 665 12132 1141 57 27 11712 Bhadrak 9329 403 272 9460 865 24 10 8793 Balangir 2219 160 134 2245 370 14 26 3584 Sonepur 1009 91 59 1041 201 6 4 2035 Cuttack 14420 1012 801 14631 1324 62 25 13616 Kendrapara 8079 331 238 8172 125 16 6 1357 Jajpur 6289 416 237 6468 606 23 9 6208 Dhenkanal 3103 380 253 3230 269 22 12 2799 Angul 3423 219 105 3537 148 7 11 14410 Ganjam 4021 372 279 4114 562 35 59 53811 Gajapati 302 32 29 305 40 11 5 4612 Kalahandi 1262 111 80 1293 255 18 8 26513 Nuapada 387 45 46 386 11 1 1 1114 Keonjhar 1705 168 104 1769 204 14 4 21415 Khurda 18026 789 294 18521 734 38 72 70016 Koraput 732 89 57 764 151 14 15 15017 Nawarangpur 151 19 24 146 107 8 5 11018 Raygada 279 71 55 295 87 6 15 7819 Mayurbhanj 5405 305 229 5481 251 37 16 27220 Phulbani 248 37 28 257 41 4 4 4121 Boudh 323 63 89 297 29 5 7 2722 Puri 7255 390 289 7356 1020 49 54 101523 Nayagarh 1674 168 61 1781 104 5 3 10624 Sambalpur 2356 165 85 2436 171 15 21 16525 Bargarh 1909 215 114 2010 259 19 19 25926 Jharsuguda 1200 94 19 1275 40 2 2 4027 Sundargarh 2266 175 148 2293 374 23 15 382TOTAL109162 7327 4794 111695 9489 535 455 9569

CourtNews5Sl. No. Name of the JudgeshipOpening Balanceas on 01.01.2013CIVIL MISC. APPEALS CIVIL REVISIONSInstitutionduring theQuarterDisposed ofduring theQuarterPendency as on31.03.2013Opening Balanceas on 01.01.2013Institution duringthe QuarterDisposed ofduring theQuarterPendency a31.03.2011 Balasore 736 39 41 734 19 1 0 202 Bhadrak 283 30 25 288 7 0 0 73 Balangir 75 3 4 74 28 2 1 294 Sonepur 27 4 3 28 6 1 0 75 Cuttack 534 60 51 543 12 0 1 116 Kendrapara 203 23 19 207 13 2 1 147 Jajpur 351 22 19 354 7 0 0 78 Dhenkanal 73 13 15 71 4 1 2 39 Angul 34 7 4 37 6 0 2 410 Ganjam 127 16 10 133 28 0 2 2611 Gajapati 1 3 0 4 2 0 0 212 Kalahandi 36 2 0 38 4 0 1 313 Nuapada 3 12 2 13 3 0 1 214 Keonjhar 77 24 4 97 3 2 0 515 Khurda 579 57 60 576 32 4 5 3116 Koraput 85 5 27 63 5 6 1 1017 Nawarangpur 17 2 1 18 2 1 1 218 Raygada 15 15 3 27 2 0 0 219 Mayurbhanj 103 7 15 95 16 1 1 1620 Phulbani 10 7 0 17 0 0 0 021 Boudh 7 9 2 14 2 0 1 122 Puri 584 31 32 583 32 0 4 2823 Nayagarh 44 0 3 41 4 0 0 424 Sambalpur 48 10 10 48 12 0 0 1225 Bargarh 65 7 6 66 27 3 5 2526 Jharsuguda 17 1 1 17 16 0 0 1627 Sundargarh 150 13 22 141 10 0 2 8TOTAL4284 422 379 4327 302 24 31 295

6CourtNewsEXECUTION PROCEEDINGS M.J.C.s / SPECIAL ACT CASESSl. No. Name of the JudgeshipOpening Balanceas on 01.01.2013Institutionduring theQuarterDisposed ofduring theQuarterPendency as on31.03.2013Opening Balanceas on 01.01.2013Institution duringthe QuarterDisposed ofduring theQuarterPendency a31.03.2011 Balasore 1059 46 8 1097 4740 558 451 48472 Bhadrak 823 28 3 848 4743 365 322 47863 Balangir 620 6 7 619 755 44 71 7284 Sonepur 165 5 7 163 188 17 13 1925 Cuttack 2781 113 27 2867 8955 792 579 91686 Kendrapara 359 2 0 361 4880 473 156 51977 Jajpur 391 111 29 473 2899 167 283 27838 Dhenkanal 1082 26 64 1044 1373 252 133 14929 Angul 709 23 22 710 1717 67 42 174210 Ganjam 1301 55 29 1327 2101 167 198 207011 Gajapati 73 3 2 74 137 17 45 10912 Kalahandi 220 10 15 215 965 125 79 101113 Nuapada 78 0 5 73 411 39 67 38314 Keonjhar 914 121 42 993 538 72 59 55115 Khurda 2545 102 34 2613 10623 689 445 1086716 Koraput 380 16 12 384 297 19 28 28817 Nawarangpur 73 1 1 73 41 10 8 4318 Raygada 151 9 5 155 154 32 64 12219 Mayurbhanj 803 29 37 795 776 102 51 82720 Phulbani 103 1 2 102 82 17 17 8221 Boudh 74 8 12 70 60 9 28 4122 Puri 607 8 11 604 3868 300 265 390323 Nayagarh 224 3 4 223 587 53 45 59524 Sambalpur 668 25 11 682 810 51 51 81025 Bargarh 598 13 22 589 306 30 33 30326 Jharsuguda 275 6 2 279 723 23 9 73727 Sundargarh 1238 68 50 1256 842 174 157 859TOTAL 18314 838 463 18689 53571 4664 3699 54536

CourtNews7M.A.C.T. CASES SESSIONS CASESSl. No. Name of the JudgeshipOpening Balanceas on 01.01.2013Institutionduring theQuarterDisposed ofduring theQuarterPendency as on31.03.2013Opening Balanceas on 01.01.2013Institution duringthe QuarterDisposed ofduring theQuarterPendency a31.03.2011 Balasore 1045 116 64 1097 606 106 62 6502 Bhadrak 571 16 16 571 220 71 65 2263 Balangir 476 26 20 482 621 94 43 6724 Sonepur 46 1 0 47 151 25 16 1605 Cuttack 9829 316 843 9302 1192 181 140 12336 Kendrapara 467 45 17 495 846 100 29 9177 Jajpur 669 37 39 667 859 101 44 9168 Dhenkanal 1093 57 40 1110 246 130 95 2819 Angul 482 86 38 530 751 41 42 75010 Ganjam 3191 228 125 3294 2403 181 80 250411 Gajapati 62 5 5 62 135 15 9 14112 Kalahandi 270 21 60 231 154 52 30 17613 Nuapada 19 11 4 26 49 22 8 6314 Keonjhar 1022 60 1 1081 615 128 64 67915 Khurda 3582 76 82 3576 1259 98 92 126516 Koraput 622 80 68 634 396 92 41 44717 Nawarangpur 196 24 24 196 214 52 31 23518 Raygada 129 14 7 136 198 31 36 19319 Mayurbhanj 690 53 153 590 470 77 65 48220 Phulbani 190 8 14 184 322 67 79 31021 Boudh 39 2 14 27 105 12 18 9922 Puri 4009 94 153 3950 1260 150 73 133723 Nayagarh 310 18 10 318 564 39 19 58424 Sambalpur 720 69 64 725 928 82 68 94225 Bargarh 508 26 5 529 386 63 20 42926 Jharsuguda 168 26 18 176 286 21 21 28627 Sundargarh 1924 81 596 1409 733 122 95 760TOTAL 32329 1596 2480 31445 15969 2153 1385 16737

8CourtNewsCRIMINAL APPEALS CRIMINAL REVISIONSSl. No. Name of the JudgeshipOpening Balanceas on 01.01.2013Institutionduring theQuarterDisposed ofduring theQuarterPendency as on31.03.2013Opening Balanceas on 01.01.2013Institution duringthe QuarterDisposed ofduring theQuarterPendency a31.03.2011 Balasore 292 20 19 293 165 15 8 1722 Bhadrak 395 22 13 404 153 19 13 1593 Balangir 168 22 7 183 109 17 9 1174 Sonepur 373 9 2 380 106 5 1 1105 Cuttack 495 54 25 524 115 36 28 1236 Kendrapara 69 17 6 80 64 9 4 697 Jajpur 122 6 3 125 63 18 11 708 Dhenkanal 77 3 2 78 29 12 3 389 Angul 141 12 6 147 73 11 9 7510 Ganjam 408 46 30 424 219 21 21 21911 Gajapati 39 6 4 41 10 1 3 812 Kalahandi 278 6 17 267 79 5 15 6913 Nuapada 43 1 12 32 2 0 0 214 Keonjhar 278 21 5 294 34 6 1 3915 Khurda 367 17 14 370 181 25 35 17116 Koraput 62 8 13 57 67 13 12 6817 Nawarangpur 80 6 6 80 23 5 1 2718 Raygada 76 5 4 77 14 4 3 1519 Mayurbhanj 104 13 12 105 68 9 9 6820 Phulbani 83 11 3 91 25 13 10 2821 Boudh 5 5 5 5 4 0 3 122 Puri 218 25 15 228 125 9 15 11923 Nayagarh 165 8 6 167 53 6 2 5724 Sambalpur 98 23 6 115 69 10 22 5725 Bargarh 117 14 20 111 96 10 15 9126 Jharsuguda 37 0 0 37 16 9 3 2227 Sundargarh 128 37 30 135 52 16 18 50TOTAL4718 417 285 4850 2014 304 274 2044

CourtNews9CRIMINAL MISC. CASESSPECIAL ACT CASESSl. No. Name of the JudgeshipOpening Balanceas on 01.01.2013Institutionduring theQuarterDisposed ofduring theQuarterPendency as on31.03.2013Opening Balanceas on 01.01.2013Institution duringthe QuarterDisposed ofduring theQuarterPendency a31.03.2011 Balasore 35 367 372 30 651 75 30 6962 Bhadrak 34 266 234 66 159 14 9 1643 Balangir 30 180 187 23 189 13 6 1964 Sonepur 4 51 50 5 45 13 4 545 Cuttack 103 650 658 95 646 40 35 6516 Kendrapara 4 140 122 22 141 10 2 1497 Jajpur 16 243 215 44 158 18 8 1688 Dhenkanal 34 200 189 45 230 39 10 2599 Angul 43 218 211 50 437 44 5 47610 Ganjam 101 863 838 126 402 64 14 45211 Gajapati 7 87 60 34 120 13 16 11712 Kalahandi 45 112 135 22 365 21 16 37013 Nuapada 5 98 88 15 24 2 3 2314 Keonjhar 78 428 376 130 149 18 0 16715 Khurda 75 659 649 85 413 20 17 41616 Koraput 37 244 221 60 155 14 9 16017 Nawarangpur 9 107 96 20 108 15 8 11518 Raygada 19 141 146 14 48 6 8 4619 Mayurbhanj 37 341 332 46 99 24 10 11320 Phulbani 7 92 84 15 13 4 0 1721 Boudh 8 52 56 4 16 3 1 1822 Puri 25 322 327 20 252 33 10 27523 Nayagarh 33 179 170 42 99 6 9 9624 Sambalpur 45 270 246 69 220 37 7 25025 Bargarh 11 203 189 25 191 28 6 21326 Jharsuguda 1 103 100 4 77 2 2 7727 Sundargarh 94 421 455 60 45 9 6 48TOTAL940 7037 6806 1171 5452 585 251 5786

10CourtNewsCRIMINAL CASES OF MAGISTERIAL COURTSSl. No. Name of the JudgeshipInstitutionduring theQuarterPendency as on 31.03.2013Gen. File Trial File Total Gen. File Trial File Total Gen. File Trial File To1 Balasore 25501 17206 42707 4917 1837 2791 4628 25147 17849 4292 Bhadrak 17715 7480 25195 1750 780 1403 2183 17353 7409 2473 Balangir 11255 7734 18989 2155 1515 721 2236 11113 7795 1894 Sonepur 3301 999 4300 1024 379 362 741 3545 1038 455 Cuttack 107993 29761 137754 2147 1171 6397 7568 103247 29086 1326 Kendrapara 13083 4264 17347 948 488 539 1027 13059 4209 1727 Jajpur 25188 6869 32057 1272 346 385 731 25393 7205 3258 Dhenkanal 17173 5702 22875 2936 2206 1034 3240 16620 5951 2259 Angul 48927 10654 59581 1746 1263 996 2259 49019 10049 59010 Ganjam 26581 14750 41331 6823 2703 3940 6643 27034 14477 41511 Gajapati 9054 1937 10991 1079 203 841 1044 9137 1889 11012 Kalahandi 22116 6244 28360 1777 167 1685 1852 22018 6267 28213 Nuapada 5631 1586 7217 889 17 570 587 5883 1636 7514 Keonjhar 15344 6762 22106 1569 234 657 891 15806 6978 22715 Khurda 110573 11124 121697 8479 2671 3740 6411 112192 11573 12316 Koraput 19334 8523 27857 1925 1044 1162 2206 19233 8343 27517 Nawarangpur 16415 5744 22159 931 211 800 1011 16502 5577 22018 Raygada 27982 3868 31850 1701 90 2064 2154 27656 3741 31319 Mayurbhanj 21850 10484 32334 1959 16 2186 2202 21901 10190 32020 Phulbani 6478 2834 9312 1744 138 1084 1222 6831 3003 9821 Boudh 1904 1347 3251 296 138 137 275 2062 1210 3222 Puri 22443 8714 31157 1574 363 1242 1605 22612 8514 31123 Nayagarh 6786 4798 11584 689 280 252 532 6774 4967 11724 Sambalpur 19741 7976 27717 2702 126 3162 3288 19229 7902 27125 Bargarh 20469 5342 25811 2001 110 1469 1579 20855 5378 26226 Jharsuguda 33636 5282 38918 1503 155 1529 1684 33645 5092 38727 Sundargarh 58050 13566 71616 2718 413 2704 3117 57791 13426 712TOTALOpening Balance as on 01.01.2013 Disposed of during the Quarter714523 211550 926073 59254 19064 43852 62916 711657 210754 922

Sl. No. Name of the JudgeshipPREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT (Vig. + C.B.I.)Opening Balanceas on 01.01.2013Institutionduring theQuarterDisposed ofduring theQuarterPendency as on31.03.20131 Balasore 459 12 6 4652 Bhadrak 0 0 0 03 Balangir 124 1 5 1204 Sonepur 0 0 0 05 Cuttack 623 48 5 6666 Kendrapara 0 0 0 07 Jajpur 0 0 0 08 Dhenkanal 0 0 0 09 Angul 4 0 1 310 Ganjam 287 17 1 30311 Gajapati 0 0 0 012 Kalahandi 83 2 6 7913 Nuapada 0 0 0 014 Keonjhar 131 3 4 13015 Khurda 737 30 18 74916 Koraput 148 9 4 15317 Nawarangpur 0 0 0 018 Raygada 0 0 0 019 Mayurbhanj 0 0 0 020 Phulbani 0 0 0 021 Boudh 0 0 0 022 Puri 0 0 0 023 Nayagarh 0 0 0 024 Sambalpur 550 8 18 54025 Bargarh 0 0 0 026 Jharsuguda 0 0 0 027 Sundargarh 0 0 0 0TOTAL3146 130 68 3208CourtNews11TOTAL NO. OF CIVIL AND CRIMINAL CASES IN THE SUB-ORDINATE JUDICIARYOF THE STATE DURING THE PERIOD FROM 1.1.2013 TO 31.3.2013Opening Bal. Institution Disposed of PendingCIVIL 227451 15406 12301 230556CRIMINAL 958312 69880 71985 956207GRAND TOTAL 1185763 85286 84286 1186763

12CourtNewsOUTLINES OF SOME RECENT ORISSA HIGH COURT JUDGEMENTSRAM KRUSHNA DASMOHAPATRA @ TIKI PUA-V- INDIAN TEA PROVISIONS LTD.RVWPET NO.74 OF 2012 (Dt.12.12.2012)A. CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908 – O-47, R-1.Judgment passed by High Court in writ appeal – Judgment challenged in SLP before the SupremeCourt – SLP dismissed – Thereafter petition for review of the judgment filed before this Court – Maintainability– Held, in view of the dismissal of SLP the judgment of the High Court has not merged with the judgmentof the Supreme Court so the aggrieved party is not deprived of the statutory right of review – Held, reviewpetition is maintainable.B. CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908 – O-47, R-1.Review – Judgment in writ appeal sough to be reviewed – Opp.Parties played fraud on the Courtas well as on the other side by not producing or bringing to the notice of the Court necessary facts anddocuments relevant to the litigation – Non-consideration of the above has rendered the judgment soughtto be reviewed erroneous – Impugned order suffers from error apparent on the face of the record – Held,impugned judgment/order is recalled and the writ appeal be listed for hearing.(V. Gopala Gowda, CJ & S. K. Mishra, J.)SUJATA KHAMARI-V- STATE OF ORISSA & ORS.W.P. (C) NO.21315 OF 2011 (Dt.16.11.2012)CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950 – ART.226.Opening of 24 hours Day and Night Medicine shop – Criteria for selection – As per Governmentguidelines allottee should be an unemployed registered Pharmacist and in case no registered pharmacistapplies, only those willing to engage a registered pharmacist, may be considered.In this case although petitioner is an unemployed registered pharmacist, his application wasrejected for non-production of income and solvency certificates and O.P.5, though not a registered pharmacistwas selected – Selection of O.P.5 challenged – Held, rejection of petitioner’s application on the groundof non-production of income and solvency certificates in her name is not justified – Discrimination – Held,order selecting O.P.5 and rejecting the application of the petitioner is quashed – Direction issued to theGovernment to delete impracticable and unrealistic conditions from the guide lines and to frame appropriateguidelines and select befitting candidate for the purpose on the basis of fresh guidelines.(V. Gopala Gowda, CJ & B. N. Mahapatra, J.)BALABHADRA NAYAK-V- STATE OF ORISSACRLREV NO.687 OF 2012 (Dt.18.12.2012)CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973 – S.457.The words “Police Officer” in Section 457 Cr.P.C. must include an Excise Officer reporting seizureof vehicle/property to a Criminal Court.In this case motor cycle of the petitioner was seized by Excise officials for alleged commission ofoffence under the NDPS Act – His application U/s.457 Cr.P.C. for release of vehicle was rejected by the

CourtNews13learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Ganjam, Berhampur on the ground that the Motor cycle wasseized by Excise officials and not by Police and as such Section 457 Cr.P.C. has no application – Held,the impugned order is set aside – Direction issued to the trial Court to release the vehicle in questionin favour of the petitioner subject to conditions imposed by this Court.(B. K. Nayak, J.)SUBAS SINGH & ORS.-V- STATE OF ORISSA & ORS.W.P.(C) NO.3369 OF 2010 (Dt.20.12.2012)A. P.I.L. – Whether the action of the State Authorities in leasing out the lands earmarked to beused as bus stand at Badambadi for a long term of 33 years with option to renew the same on mutualconsent after completion of the period of lease in favour of Reliance Retail Ltd. (O.P.4) for its commercialuse on the ground that it would develop Badambadi Bus stand on public private participation mode isjustified – Held, No.B. P.I.L. – Whether the State Authorities are justified in leasing out the lands and buildings ofBadambadi Bus stand for generation of funds to liquidate the pending dues of the employees of theOSRTC – Held, No.In this case cabinet approval not taken before taking a final decision in the matter of selling/leasingout the property in question – Hence the matter may be placed before the cabinet and in case the cabinetapproves the proposal then a transparent method should be followed in order to fetch best price and incase cabinet does not approve O.P.4 shall not be entitled to be granted with the lease and the StateAuthorities to return the amount paid by O.P.4.(V. Gopala Gowda, CJ & B. N. Mahapatra, J.)M/S. RANBAXY LABORATORIES LTD. & ANR.-V- STATE OF ORISSA & ANR.CRLMC. 2541 OF 2008 & CRLREV NO.272 OF 2008 (Dt.15.03.2012)CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973 – S. 482.Prosecution report submitted and cognizance taken against accused persons for commission ofoffence punishable under a non existent statutory provision – Held, impugned order taking cognizance isset aside and the Criminal Proceeding is dropped.(B. K. Patel, J.)STATE OF ORISSA -V- SUKA PALEIDSREF NO.2 OF 2012 & JCRLA NO.13 OF 2012(Dt.11.10.2012)PENAL CODE, 1860 – S.302.Murder – Death Penalty – Murder not committed to satisfy any greed or lust – Appellant has neitherany bad antecedent nor he is a hard core Criminal nor an anti-social nor an anti-national element – Hewas illiterate, rustic being guided by the blind belief that his son has been affected by witchcraft practicedby deceased Sapan Dehury – An illiterate and rustic when influenced by blind faith is bound to becomeimpulsive in his act and he is bound to become mad to complete an act, which in his sense of right andwrong is right – Held, this case cannot be considered as a rarest of rare case for imposition of deathpenalty – Sentence of death is modified to life imprisonment.( L. Mohapatra, J & C.R. Dash, J.)

14CourtNewsMANOJ KUMAR BISWAL-V- CUTTACK DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS.W.P.(C) NO.15695 OF 2006 (Dt.19.03.2012)SERVICE – DLR employees – Preparation of Gradation list – Consideration of initial date ofappointment on casual or DLR basis is important.In this case petitioner was engaged as DLR employee by C.D.A. through Balashrama w.e.f.15.3.1989 and was getting wages through Balashrama and he got direct payments from C.D.A. w.e.f.21.8.1992 – Private Opp.Parties engaged in the year 1990 – In the provisional gradation list petitionerwas placed at Sl.No.7 and Opp.Parties 5 to 9 were placed at Sl.No.8,9, 11, 12 & 13 respectively –C.D.A. took a decision to revise the provisional gradation list and make it final by taking into account thedate of receipt of wages by the D.L.R. employees directly from C.D.A. which is under challenge – Held,the decision of C.D.A. is arbitrary, unreasonable, discriminating and unjust – Preparation of final gradationlist is quashed – Direction issued to C.D.A. authority to prepare the gradation list of D.L.R. Junior Asstswho were initially appointed/engaged on casual or DLR basis by taking into account their past service asDLR from the date of their initial appointment/engagement.(B. P. Das, J. & B. K. Nayak, J.)GIRIDHARI MISHRA-V- STATE OF ORISSA & ORS.W.P.(C) NO.11404 OF 2004 (Dt.16.11.2012)P. I. L. – Crop loss due to natural calamites – Central Government introduced National AgriculturalScheme through concerned State Governments for Crop insurance by farmers – In Odisha each “Block”has been taken as an unit i.e. “Defined area” under the Scheme for assessment of loss of Crops – Sincepetitioner’s land is not irrigated he sustained crop loss but failed to receive insurance claim as most ofthe agricultural lands of his block are irrigated – Hence the writ petition.When premium have been collected by the Insurance Company on individual basis the Insuranceclaim should be settled on individual basis or taking Gram Panchayat as “Defined area” – Held, directionissued to the State Government to consider petitioners claim declaring the “Defined area” under theScheme to take “Gram Panchayat” as a unit and not the “Block” for the purpose of granting insuranceclaim.(V. Gopala Gowda, CJ & B. N. Mahapatra, J.)PATHANI JENA & ORS.-V- STATE OF ORISSACRLA. NO.126 OF 2006 (Dt.05.09.2012)CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973 – S.161.Delayed disclosure of incident by witnesses – Explanation offered not convincing – Held, it wouldnot be safe to accept the testimony of such dubious witnesses.In this case occurrence took place on 11.11.2004 and P.Ws. 3 and 4 stated to be eye witnesseswere not examined till 18.11.2004 although police had made several visits to the occurrence village –P.W.3 has also admitted that he is in inimical terms with the accused persons – P.W.4 has given falseexplanation that he was examined on the next day of the incident – P.W.10, the I.O. introduced P.Ws.3& 4 as eye witnesses just to solve the case – Held, evidence of P.Ws.3 and 4 is highly infirm and it isnot safe to rely on their evidence – Impugned judgment and order of sentence are set aside.( L. Mohapatra, J & C.R. Dash, J.)

CourtNews15SK. ABDUL AHAD & ANR.-V- STATE OF ORISSA & ORS.O.J.C. NOS.8819 & 6311 OF 2000 (Dt.17.09.2012)CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950 – ART.226.Compensation – Death of three maternity patients with two new born babies due to administrationof contaminated IV fluid (Saline) supplied in SCB Medical College and Hospital, Cuttack – Negligence andlack of care by Hospital authorities – Violation of right to life of the patients – Held, State to paycompensation of Rs.5.00 lakhs each to the legal heirs of three maternity patients for the tortious actcommitted by its employees and may recover the same from the negligent doctors responsible for theirdeath and initiate action against Drug Controller of Odisha and EPM Authorities for their lapses and toexpedite departmental action against defaulting doctors.( V. Gopala Gowda, CJ & B. N. Mahapatra, J.)PANDA KANOJIA-V- SANKAR BAGHEL & ORS.R.S.A. NO.266 OF 2004 (Dt.14.03.2012)CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908 – S.100.Substantial question of law – No specific pleading in the plaint regarding adverse possession –Plaintiff claims title over the suit property basing on an unregistered sale deed – Suit dismissed – Lowerappellate court without assigning reasons reversed the finding of fact and decreed the suit – The abovequestion assume the character of substantial question of law – Held, judgment passed by the learnedlower appellate court is set aside and judgment and decree passed by the trial Court is restored.( M. M. Das, J.)M/S. BHUSAN POWER & STEEL LTD.-V- STATE OF ORISSA & ANR.W.P.(C) NO.25036 OF 2011 (Dt.19.10.2012)A. ODISHA ENTRY TAX RULES, 1999 – RULE 3 (4).Concessional levy of tax – A manufacturer is entitled to avail concessional levy of entry tax if thescheduled goods are used as raw material by him and a declaration in Form E-15 is furnished by suchmanufacturer to the seller – There is nothing in Rule 3 (4) or declaration given in Form E-15 that in orderto avail concessional levy of tax, manufacturer is required to sell the finished products inside the stateand he will be disentitled to avail the concessional levy of tax in terms of Rule 3 (4) if goods aredispatched/transferred to out side the State – Held, benefit of concessional levy of tax under Rule 3 (4)cannot be denied to the petitioner on the ground of transfer of manufactured goods to the branchessituated out side the state.B. ODISHA ENTRY TAX RULES, 1999 – RULE- 3 (4).Whether petitioner is entitled to avail concessional levy of entry tax on purchase of coal which isused to generate electricity in his captive plant – Held, No.The requirement of Rule 3(4) is that the Scheduled goods purchased must be used as raw materialin manufacturing the finished product – In this case the petitioner-Company manufactures sponge ironbillets and H.R. Coil, so to manufacture such finished goods coal is not the raw material – Coal is a rawmaterial for generating electricity, which is, in turn, essential to run the plant and for that it cannot be saidthat coal is a raw material for manufacturing sponge iron billets and H.R. Coil – Held, petitioner is notentitled to avail concessional levy of entry tax on purchase of coal which is used to generate electricityin his captive plant.(V. Gopala Gowda, CJ & B. N. Mahapatra, J.)

16CourtNewsMANORAMA MOHANTY & ORS.-V- AUTHORIZED OFFICER & ORS.W.P.(C) NO.6913 OF 2008 (With Batch) (Dt.21.12.2012)SECRUITSATION & RECONSTRUCTION OF FINANCIAL ASSETS & ENFORCEMENT OF SECURITYINTEREST ACT, 2002 ( in short SARFAESI ACT,2002) – S.13.Whether the Co-operative Banks are entitled to take action under the SARFAESI Act, 2002, againstthe petitioners to enforce the security interest as created by the petitioners while taking loan when disputecase U/ss. 68 & 70 of the Orissa Co-operative Societies Act, 1962 is pending – Held, pendency of DisputeCase U/ss. 68 & 70 of the OCS Act does not debar the Co-operative Banks from invoking the provisionsof the SARFAESI Act to enforce security interest for liquidation of loan not repaid.( M. M. Das, J & C.R. Dash, J.)SUKANTI JENA-V- STATE OF ODISHA & ORS.W.P.(C) NO.11212 OF 2012 (Dt.21.12.2012)ANGANWADI WORKER – Appointment – Advertisement made for one post – Five candidatesapplied – One Sasmita Behera was selected/appointed having secured highest marks – Petitioner wassecond in the merit list – As Sasmita was regularly attending C.T. training petitioner filed appeal challengingher appointment before the A.D.M. – Sasmita was disengaged – Since petitioner was not given appointmentin that vacancy she filed the writ petition.As per guide lines of the Government Dt.2.5.2007 vacancy need be filled up immediately – SinceSasmita has not challenged her disengagement order nor the rest three candidates challenged the selectlist prepared by the Selection Committee, right accrues in favour of the petitioner for appointment in thatvacancy – Held, direction issued to the CDPO (O.P.4) to issue order of engagement to the petitioner asAnganwadi worker.( B. N. Mahapatra, J. )HAWKINS COOKERS LTD. & ORS.-V- SRI JAGANNATH TRADERSCRP. NO.49 OF 2010 (Dt.14.12.2012)A. CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908 – O-.14, R-2.Issue relating to lack of territorial jurisdiction of the Court ought to be decided before the partieswent into trial of the suit.In this case admittedly on 6.7.2010 the Plaintiff-O.P. filed evidence on affidavit Under Order 18, Rule4 C.P.C. and the defendant-Petitioners cross-examined P.W.1 – Held, the Defendants-petitioners havewaived their right of raising objection as to territorial jurisdiction of the trial Court and to make a prayerto try that issue as preliminary issue.B. CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908 – O-14, R-2(2).Where two or more Courts have jurisdiction to try a suit, whether the parties can agree to submitthemselves to the jurisdiction of one of these Courts and oust the jurisdiction of other Courts and if theanswer is in affirmative, whether such an agreement is against the public policy – Held, where two or moreCourts have jurisdiction to try a suit, the parties can agree to submit themselves to the jurisdiction of oneof those Courts and oust the jurisdiction of other Courts and such an agreement is not against the publicpolicy.

C. CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908 – O-14, R-2 (2).CourtNews17Whether the issue of jurisdiction is to be taken up as a preliminary issue – Plain reading of theprovision shows that a suit can be disposed of on an issue of law as preliminary issue if that issue relatesto the jurisdiction of the Court or a bar to the suit created by any law.In this case trial Court is of the view that the issue relating to jurisdiction should not be decidedas preliminary issue and it can be taken up simultaneously with other issues for effective adjudication ofthe lis – Held, trail Court has not committed any mistake in taking such a decision.( B. N. Mahapatra, J.)THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELECTRICAL) NESCO-V- OMBUDSMAN-II,(ELECTRICITY), BBSR & ORS.W.P.(C) NO.10405 OF 2012 (Dt.04.12.2012)ELECTRICITY – OERC Supply Code 2004 and Regulation 80 (5) (ii) – Whether “hatchery” comesunder “Poultry” farming which is covered under Regulation 80 (5) (ii) i.e. allied agricultural activities ? –Held, Yes.In this case O.P.2 is a hatchery unit whose job is to hatch the eggs to produce chicks and as suchthe activities of the hatchery unit comes within the purview of poultry – Held, poultry includes hatcheryand is covered under Regulation 80 (5) (ii) i.e. allied agricultural activities – Direction issued to thepetitioner to implement the order of the OMBUDSMAN.(B. N. Mahapatra, J.)LALIT BERIWALA-V- STATE OF ORISSA & ANR.CRLMC NO.4792 OF 2011 (Dt.30.11.2012)NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT, 1881 – Ss. 138, 141.Commission of offence by company – When the company can be prosecuted then the Director orany other person in charge of the management of the company can also be prosecuted being vicariouslyliable for the offence committed by the company – It is also necessary that there must be clear avermentsand proof that the company committed the offence otherwise the individuals issuing the cheque can bepersonally held liable U/s.138 N.I. Act.In this case the petitioner did not enter into the transaction and entrusted the work to the complainantin his individual capacity but as the authorized agent of the company – Although there is no specificallegation in the complaint petition that the complainant entered into the transaction with the company,the combined effect of all the averments make it clear that he transacted with the company through itsauthorized agent (Petitioner) for company’s work and received the company cheque which was bounced– Held, offence must be said to have been committed by the company – Since the company has not beenmade an accused, the complaint case filed against the petitioner describing him in his official capacityis bad hence the order taking cognizance against the petitioner as well as the complaint case arequashed.(B. K. Nayak, J.)

18CourtNewsGHANASHYAM PATRA & ORS.-V- UNION OF INDIA & ANR.FAO. NO.260 OF 2006 (Dt.14.12.2012)RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL ACT, 1987 – S.123 (c ).Untoward incident – Deceased belongs to state of Orissa – Accident occurred when he was alonemoving in a local train in Mumbai – Not expected to get an eye witness – Documentary evidence showsthat the deceased fell down from the running train and sustained injuries – Railway authorities failed toadduce evidence to establish that claimants are not entitled to compensation – Held, order passed by theChairman and Member (Technical) of the Tribunal is set aside and the order passed by the Member(Judicial) holding that the claimants are entitled for compensation is confirmed.(B. K. Patel, J. )SUCHANDRA KU. NAYAK & ORS.-V- STATE OF ORISSA & ORS.W.P.(C) NO.27674 OF 2011 (Dt.02.11.2012)SERVICE – Petitioners were called to attend the selection process conducted by the SelectionBoard and were found qualified for the post of Junior Assistant – Their claim was rejected on the groundthat their case is covered by a decision of this Court in OJC No.3694/99 although it has really noapplication to the case of the petitioners – Held, petitioners are entitled to be absorbed in the post ofJunior Assistant – Direction issued for their appointment before the State Government goes for any freshselection for Junior Assistants in the L.R.S Cadre.( B. P. Das, J & B. K. Nayak, J. )PRABIR KUMAR DAS-V- STATE OF ODISHA & ORS.W.P.(C) NO.15779 OF 2012 (Dt.26.11.2012)COMPENSATION – Railway accident near an unmanned level crossing – Death of 14 persons –Writ petition for compensation – Opp.Parties took the plea of alternative remedy before the Railway ClaimsTribunal – Negligence on the part of the railway authorities – Held, it would be just and proper to awardRs.5,00,000/- each to the keen of the persons who have lost their life.( V. Gopala Gowda, CJ & B. K. Misra, J. )RASHMIREKHA PATRA & ORS.-V- STATE OF ORISSA & ORS.W.P.(C) NO.1716 OF 2012 (With Batch) (Dt.14.12.2012)EDUCATION – Whether the benefit provided under Resolution Dt.16.02.2008 to Education Volunteersworking in EGS Centres should be extended to the Education volunteers working in AIE Centres ? – Held,Yes.In this case both Education volunteers working in EGS/AIE Centres were disengaged pursuant toResolution Dt.16.02.2008 – Both the Centres are functioning under the same scheme – It is also notdisputed by the Opp.Parties that similarly situated persons in other districts have been engaged asGanasikshyaks under Sarba Sikshya Abhiyan – Discrimination and violation of Articles 14 & 16 of theConstitution of India – Held, O.P.1 is not justified to hold that petitioners who are working as Educationvolunteers in AIE Centres are not entitled to be engaged as Ganasikshyak and only Education volunteersworking in EGS Centres are to be rehabilitated as Ganasikshyaks under Sarba Sikshya Abhiyan.(B. N. Mahapatra, J. )

CourtNews19SUBASH CHANDRA PANDA-V- STATE OF ODISHA & ORS.W.P.(C) NO.24213 OF 2011 (Dt.13.12.2012)SERVICE – Dismissal of petitioner – Petitioner was neither allowed to engage an advocate todefend his case nor he was permitted to Cross-examine the witnesses examined by the corporation –Violation of principles of natural justice – Enquiry report submitted by the authority could not have beenaccepted by the Disciplinary authority but the same was accepted and second show cause notice wasissued – Past service record of the petitioner was not taken into consideration while imposing majorpunishment – Held, punishment imposed is shockingly disproportionate to the charges proved – Impugnedorder of removal of the petitioner from service is quashed as the same suffers from doctrine of proportionality.(V. Gopala Gowda, CJ & B. N. Mahapatra, J.)RAJASHREE NAYAK-V- STATE OF ORISSA & ORS.W.P.(C) NO.16218 OF 2012 (Dt.30.11.2012)EDUCATION – Admission into MBBS Course 2012 - Held, prioritization procedure adopted by O.P.2& 3 for admission, ignoring the merit list is illegal and violative of the rules of merit.In this Case out of total seats of 450 in Government Colleges 3% reserved for Ex-service mencategory (in short ESM Category ) which comes to 14 – Petitioner secured 15 rank under ESM category– Candidates placed at Sl.Nos.1,2 & 3 took admission under General category and Sl.No.14 was foundunsuitable to take admission so petitioners’ position comes to Sl.No.11 in ESM Category -When Opp.Partiesallowed candidates to take admission whose positions were below the rank of the petitioner on the basisof prioritization procedure ignoring the case of the petitioner, he filed this writ petition - Held, Directionissued to Op.2 & 3 to give admission to the petitioner in MBBS course as per her rank under ESM quota.( Sanju Panda, J.)SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT, 1963 – Ss.31, 34.DILLIP KUMAR SAHOO-V- MALATI ROUT & ORS.R.S.A. NO.153 OF 2010 (Dt.14.12.2012)Registered document – Presumption is, it is validly executed and prima facie it is valid in law –Onus lies on the person who wants to rebut such presumption.In this case plaintiffs plead that fraud practiced on them while executing General Power of AttorneyExt-1 in favour of Defendant No.2 and the impugned sale deeds Exts-B & C executed by Defendant No.2in favour of Defendant No.1 are the outcome of such fraud – No prayer in the suit to declare G.P.A. Ext.1void – Both the Courts below failed to take note of the evidence of plaintiff No.3, examined as P.W.1, thatthey were present in the office of the Sub-Registrar on the date of sale of the suit land and raised noobjection against such registration – Held, G.P.A. Ext.1 is a valid document so also the sale deeds Exts.B & C – Defendant No.1 has acquired title over the suit property on the strength of the above sale deedsas true owner and acquired right to enforce the right, title and interest over the suit property.( B. K. Patel, J.)

20CourtNewsNARAYAN KEDIA-V- PRASANTA KU. PATTNAIKR.S.A. NO.462 OF 2006 (Dt.11.12.2012)A. TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT, 1882 – S.106.Tenancy – Suit for eviction of a tenant by a Co-owner without impeading other co-owners –Maintainability – Held, one of the successors to the property while in jointness can maintain a suit againstthe tenant for eviction from out of the joint property unless a conflict between the Co-sharers is broughtout on evidence.In this case plaintiff-respondent filed the suit for eviction in the absence of his four sisters who havejoint interest in the property – Jurisprudentially it is not correct to say that a co-owner of a property isnot its owner – He owns every part of the composite property along with others and it cannot be said thathe is only a part owner of the property – The position can only be changed when partition takes place- The defendant has also not established through evidence any conflict between the plaintiff and hissisters – Held, Courts below are correct in holding that the suit for eviction is maintainable at the behestof the sole respondent-Plaintiff.( M. M. Das, J.)FALCON REAL ESTATE PVT. LTD. & ANR.-V- JANAK MUKARI DEVI & ORS.W.P.(C) NOS.11550 & 11685 OF 2012 (Dt.27.11.2012)CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908 – O-18, R-17.Suit for partition – During pendency of Final Decree Proceeding Defendant Nos.3 & 4 were implededon the ground that they purchased some property involved in the suit – Thereafter they filed petition torecall witnesses examined at the stage of preliminary decree for Cross-examination – Application rejected– Hence this writ petition.In a suit for partition, in the event of changed circumstances, necessitating change in shares, thereis no impediment for a Court to amend the preliminary decree or pass another preliminary decree redeterminingthe rights and interest of the parties – Held, the impugned order is set aside with a directionto the learned trial Court to recall the witnesses for Cross-examination by the Petitioners-Defendant Nos.3& 4 after recasting the issues and pass a fresh preliminary decree.(M. M. Das, J.)SAMIR MOHANTY-V- STATE OF ODISHA & ORS.W.P.(C) NO.30961 OF 2011 (Dt.20.12.2012)A. CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950 – ART, 299.Contract between the State and Private individual – All Contracts made in exercise of the executivepower of the Union or of a State shall be expressed to be made by the President or by the Governor ofthe State as the case may be and all such contracts and assurances of property made in exercise ofthat power shall be executed on behalf of the President or the Governor by such persons and in suchmanner as he may direct and authorize.In this case the Governor has not authorized any body to execute the lease agreement but theChairman-cum-M.D., OSRTC delegated the General Manager OSRTC to execute the same – Held, theimpugned agreement is void abinitio, hence quashed – The O.P.5 & 6 concessionaire cannot have anyright or interest over the land in question on the basis of the said void document.

CourtNews21B. P. I. L. – Transfer of Barmunda Bus Stand land in favour of O.Ps 5 & 6 – Action of the StateGovernment is in utter disregard of the Constitutional and statutory provisions – Petitioner being a localresident challenged the action – Locus standi – Petitioner has taken genuine steps to protect the propertyfrom being misutilised and it cannot be said that it is a private interest litigation – Held, since the petitionerhas espoused the cause of the public at large, the writ petition at his instance is maintainable.C. MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 – S.96.Construction of Barmunda Bus Terminal – A Bus stand can only be notified by the RTA havingjurisdiction over the area – If any authority other than the RTA has taken the decision selecting the placein which the Bus stand will operate, the same shall be treated as null and void in the eye of law – SinceO.P. Nos.1,2,3 entered into a contract with O.P.6 for construction of Barmunda Bus terminal there isstatutory violation of the above provision – Held, petitioner can challenge the validity of the impugnedagreement Dt.16.03.2011 entered in to by O.P.1, 2 & 3 with O.P. 6.D. TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT, 1882 – S.54.“Profit a prendre” - Meaning of – It is a profit or benefit arising out of the land regarded as“immovable property” within the meaning of Section 3(26) of the General Clauses Act and Section 2(6) ofthe Registration Act.In this case OSRTC executed an unregistered agreement creating permanent lease with an areaof Ac.14.430 decimals in favour of O.P.5 & 6 for construction of modern Bus Terminus over 60% andcommercial complex over 40% of the above land which is under challenge.The right to construct modern Bus terminus and commercial complex and to appropriate profit beinga “Profit a Prendre” i.e. profit or benefit arising out of the above land it has to be regarded as immovableproperty and its sale has to be by means of a registered instrument as its value is much more thanRs.100/- - Held, the impugned transaction being under an unregistered instrument it has not conferred titleor interest in favour of OP. 5 & 6.E. TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT, 1882 – Ss. 105 & 107.Distinction between “lease” and “License” – A lease cannot be converted into a license merely bycalling it as license but it will have to be determined from the recitals of the document itself whether thenature of transaction entered into between the parties, the interest over the property has been given ormerely a right of user has been given to the adversary.In this case an interest over the land in question has been conferred upon O.P.5 & 6 by way ofan agreement to enjoy the exclusive possession of the property and to derive profit out of it – Held, thistype of transaction cannot be said to have created a mere license – O.P. 5 & 6 are lessees and notlicenses.(V. Gopala Gowda, CJ & S. K. Mishra, J.)DASRATHI RANA & ANR.-V- STATECRLREV. NO. 474 OF 2012 (Dt.04.01.2013)S.C. & S.T. (P. A.) ACT, 1989 – 3 (1) (i) (ii) (x)Quashing of order taking cognizance U/s.3 (i) (i) (x) of the S.C. & S.T. (P.A.) Act, 1989 and U/ss.341, 294, 323 506, 34 I.P.C.In this case the informant, a member of Schedule Caste being engaged as a Tahali (messenger)by the villagers went to the house of the petitioner asking them to come to the village meeting and togive festival chanda and it is alleged that the petitioner No.1 abused him in obscene language saying himas “Pana”, his Caste name and petitioner No.2 instigated petitioner No.1 to assault and petitioner No.1dealt two slaps to the informant threatending him to kill.

22CourtNewsThe allegations do not satisfy the ingredients of the offences U/s.3 (1) (ii) (x) of the SC & ST (P.A.)Act but there is no infirmity for the offences under which cognizance taken under different sections ofI.P.C.- Held, cognizance taken against the petitioners U/s.3(1)(i)(ii) (x) of the SC & ST (P.A.) Act isquashed - Trial shall only proceed in respect of the offence under the Indian Penal Code.(B. K. Nayak, J.)KISHORE KALET-V- STATE OF ORISSA & ORS.CRLMC. NO.1774 OF 2009 (Dt.08.01.2013)CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973 – S.319.The Court must have reasonable satisfaction from the evidence already collected during trial or inthe inquiry that some other person, who is not arraigned as an accused in that case has committed anoffence and for such offence that other person could as well be tried along with the already arraignedaccused – However, entertaining some doubt about the involvement of another person in the offence is notenough for the Court to exercise such discretionary power.In this case the informant in the F.I.R. and in his Examination-in-Chief stated that he learnt thatO.P.3 & 4 called the victim girl and took her to the bus stand where the accused was waiting – The victimgirl having not stated about the involvement of O.P.3 & 4 in the occurrence before the I.O. or before theC.J.M. Port Blair or before the S.D.J.M., Rourkela, there is no reasonable prospect of the case againstO.P.3 & 4 ending in conviction – Held, there is no infirmity in the impugned order passed by the trial Court.( B. K. Nayak, J.)HARIHAR KHARASUDHA PATNAIK-V- STATE OF ORISSA.CRLA NO.519 OF 2OO9 (Dt.09.01.2013)CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973 – S.389 (1).Power of the Appellate Court – Appellate Court in an exceptional case, may stay conviction andsentence but such power must be exercised with great circumspection and caution where the appellantwith all fairness satisfies the Court that failure to stay the conviction would lead to injustice and irreversibleconsequences.In this case provisional pension sanctioned in favour of the appellant has been withdrawn as perRule 7 of the OCS (Pension) Rules 1992 in view of his conviction – Withdrawal of pension does not amountto an irreversible consequence since in the event the conviction is set aside in appeal the petitioner wouldbe entitled to all arrears of pension – Held, the appellant-petitioner is not entitled to any relief sought for.(B. K. Nayak, J. )DHADIA @ GOPAL CHANDRA MISHRA-V- STATE OF ORISSAJCRLA NO.38 OF 1997 (Dt.16.01.2013)CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973 – S.465.Appellant charged for the offences U/ss 302, 201, 34 I.P.C. during trial – Trial Court added chargesU/ss 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Section 4 of D.P. Act on the date of delivery of judgment and convicted theappellant only on newly added charges – No de-novo trial for the newly added charges – No-opportunity

CourtNews23for the appellant to explain any incriminating evidence or circumstance in relation to such charges – Held,a failure of justice has occasioned as envisaged U/s.365 Cr. P.C. – Conviction of the appellant U/s. 498-A, 304-B I.P.C. and Section 4 D.P. Act is liable to be set aside.(B. K. Nayak, J.)JAYANTA KUMAR SAHU-V- LAXMIDHAR SAHUW.P.(C) NO.5379 OF 2011 (Dt.16.01.2013)CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908 – O-6, R-17.Amendment of plaint can be filed at any stage of the proceeding and delay is not, always, a factorto refuse amendment – Primary duty of the Court to shorten litigation and it is not required to go in tothe correctness or falsity of the case in the amendment.In the present case the proposed amendment are only elucidation of some facts which are alreadyon record and since no new facts are introduced the learned Court below should not have disallowed theprayer for amendment – Held, impugned order rejecting the application for amendment is set aside.(B. K. Misra, J.)URDHABA GOUDA-V- STATE OF ORISSAJCLA NO.68 OF 2001 (Dt.18.01.2013)PENAL CODE, 1860 S.304, PART-I.Accused and deceased had a fight two hours prior to the incident in which accused had given slapsto the deceased – Due to intervention of other people both left the place – However deceased again camenear the house of the accused and instigated him to assault by saying “A GOUDA MOTE MARIBU PARAAA AA MARE” – Hearing this the accused became enraged and on heat of passion picked up a knifeand stabbed the deceased.Held, appellant had no pre-meditation to assault the deceased rather on a heat of passion heinflicted such bodily injury which is likely to cause death – Offence is coming U/s. 304, Part-I I.P.C. butnot U/s.302 I.P.C.(Sanju Panda, J & B.N. Mahapatra, J.)CHANDABAI SHARMA-V- ADDL. D.M, BARGARH & ORS.W.P.(C) NO.6797 OF 2002 (Dt.21.01.2013)ODISHA LAND REFORMS ACT, 1960 – S.37 (b).Ceiling proceeding – Definition of “Family” – Petitioner a married daughter prior to the appointed datei.e. 26.09.1970 – Ceiling proceeding against her father after his death – Subsequently draft statement wasrevised in the name of the petitioner and four others being Class-I heirs of her father.Held, petitioner being married prior to the appointed date, she cannot be considered to be a memberof the family of her father but she being a Class-I heir of her father each one of such heir would be treatedas a separate and distinct “Family” within the definition of Section 37 (b) of the Act for the purpose ofceiling proceeding and they cannot also be considered an “association or body of individuals” so as tobe treated as a single person within the meaning of Section 37 (a) of the Act.

24CourtNewsODISHA LAND REFORMS (GENERAL) RULES, 1965 – RULE 30 (2).Notice in ceiling proceeding – Proceeding against five persons including the petitioner as Class-Iheir of the deceased land holder – Notice not issued in the name of the petitioner – Violation of naturaljustice – Issuance of notice to any one of the heirs cannot be treated as sufficient compliance of themandate of the Rule – Allegation that the petitioner had knowledge of the proceeding – Held, provisionof Rule 30 (2) of the Rules being mandatory in nature, mere knowledge of the proceeding by a personinterested cannot be a justification for dispensing with service of notice.( B. K. Nayak, J. )USHADEVI SUKHANI-V- CUTTACK DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS.W.P.(C) NO.13932 OF 2012 (Dt.30.01.2013)ODISHA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ACT,Allotment of residential plots at “Bidanasi Project Area “ – Delay in making construction – Violationof Clause in the Brochure – Show Cause notice issued calling upon the allottee for cancellation ofallotment/resumption of land – Action challenged.Clause mentioned in the Brochure are not statutory in nature – Cancellation of allotment if thereis negligence on the part of the allote and the reasons assigned in the show cause are not bona fide –Action being drastic in nature, should not be done mechanically – Held, cancellation of allotment shouldbe adopted as a last resort – Fresh directions issued along with the directions issued in W.P.(C) No.20924of 2009.(M. M. Das, J.)SARAT CHANDRA DAS -V- ORISSA STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION.W.P.(C) NO.8628 OF 2011 (Dt.30.01.2013)SERVICE LAW – Continuance of disciplinary proceeding against petitioner after retirement – Petitioneran employee in Odisha State Warehousing Corporation and he is governed under Odisha State WarehousingCorporation (Staff) Regulations 1985 – No specific provision in the Regulation for continuance of departmentalproceeding after retirement – Held, disciplinary proceeding against the petitioner is quashed – Directionissued for payment of retrial benefits to him forthwith.( M. M. Das, J & B. K. Misra, J.)MIDEAST INTEGRATED STEELS LTD. & ORS.-V- STATE OF ORISSA & ANR.CRLMC. NO.3684 OF 2010 (Dt.04.02.2013)CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973 – S.482.Complaint Case – Cognizance taken U/ss. 406, 468, 420, 422,34 I.P.C. – Dispute is basically Civilin nature – No prima facie material to find out that the offences for which cognizance taken have beencommitted in the instant case – Continuance of Criminal Proceeding will be nothing but an abuse of theprocess of law – Held, order taking cognizance as well as the complaint proceeding quashed.( M. M. Das, J.)

CourtNews25ANANTASWAR DEB & ORS.-V- HARIHAR ACHARYA.W.P.(C) NO.9098 OF 2004 (Dt.05.02.2013)CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908 – O-6, R-17.Amendment of written statement – Objection raised that it was filed after closure of evidence – TrialCourt allowed amendment – Order challenged.In this case suit is of the year, 1999 – As proviso to Order 6, Rule 17 C.P.C. was inserted w.e.f.1.7.2002 in view of the C.P.C. Amendment Act, 2002 it has no application to the suit filed in the year 1999– Held, impugned order passed by the learned Court below calls for no interference by this Court.( B.K. Misra, J.)SUSHANTA KUMAR GOUDA-V- UNION OF INDIA & ORS.W.P.(C) NO.7984 OF 2010(Dt.07.02.2013)SERVICE LAW - Petitioner belonged to a Para-Military Organization – He remained un-authorizedlyabsent from duty for 511 days – Plea that he was looking after his ailing mother in the absence of anyother male member in the family was not believed – Punishment of removal from service cannot be saidas disproportionate or shocking – Held, order of removal from service is justified.( M. M. Das, J & B. K. Misra, J. )BAIJAYANTI SWAIN & ANR.-V- STATE OF ORISSA.CRLREV NO.701 OF 2012 (Dt.07.02.2013)PENAL CODE, 1860 – S.120-B.Criminal Conspiracy – Offence of Criminal Conspiracy has its foundation in an agreement to commitan offence – A conspiracy consists not merely in the intention of two or more, but in the agreement oftwo or more to do an unlawful act by unlawful means.In the instant case there is no allegation of any understanding or agreement by the petitioners withthe Vice-Chairman of CDA (co-accused) to cause a pecuniary gain either to the co-accused or to thepetitioners – Held, framing of charge against the petitioners was unwarranted hence the impugned orderis set aside.( B. K. Nayak, J.)KRUSHNA BISOI-V- DHANESWARI BISOI & ANR.CRLREV NO. 570 OF 2005 (Dt.07.02.2013)CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973 – S.401.Offence U/ss. 450 and 376 I.P.C. – Acquittal of the accused by the trial Court – Finding of the trialCourt regarding the age of the victim based on no evidence – Examination of the father of the victim wasillegally dispensed with who is competent to tell about the age of the victim – Trial Court failed indischarging its duty as required under law, causing miscarriage of justice – Lower revisional Court rightlyset aside the order of acquittal directing retrial by examining the father of the victim and arranging medicalexamination of the victim for determination of her age at the time of occurrence – Held, impugned revisionalorder calls for no interference.(B. K. Nayak, J.)

26CourtNewsPENAL CODE, 1860 – Ss. 420, 468, 471.SUKANTI CHOUDHURY -V- STATE OF ORISSACRLREV NO.1407 OF 2008 (Dt.08.02.2013)Offence of cheating and forgery – To establish the offence fraudulent or dishonest intention of theaccused is required to be proved.In this case prosecution alleged that the petitioner used forged High School Certificate issued bythe Board of Secondary Education Orissa – No material that the petitioner had any role to forge andprocure the certificate – No inference also can be made on the basis of surmises and conjectures in aCriminal Proceeding – In the absence of any material to indicate existence of the essential ingredient ofrequired knowledge or intention, continuance of the Criminal proceeding against the petitioner will amountto an abuse of process of Court – Held, impugned order taking cognizance is set aside and the CriminalProceeding is dropped.(B. K. Patel, J.)ANANDA CHANDRA OJHA-V- ASHOK SAHOOW.P.(C). NO.1698 OF 2013 (Dt.13.02.2013)ELECTION DISPUTE – Grama Panchayat Election – Recounting of votes – When can be ordered– Election Petition seeking re-counting of votes must contain serial number of ballots illegally acceptedor rejected and the source of information – The name of the agent who had furnished such informationand the note book on the basis of which such details had been furnished must be disclosed in the electionpetition out of which the Tribunal must be prima facie satisfied that in order to decide the dispute betweenthe parties such an order is imperatively necessary.In the present case learned trial Court is totally misconceived regarding pleadings raised and theevidence adduced by the election petitioner while passing the impugned order – Held, the impugned orderis set aside – Direction issued to the learned trial Court to proceed with the trial.(Sanju Panda, J. )MAMITA CHOUDHURY-V- STATE OF ORISSA & ORS.W.P.(C) NO.14166 OF 2008 (Dt.18.02.2013)ODISHA EXCISE RULES, 1965 – RULE 34 (1) (d).Opening of IMFL ‘ON’ shop (Bar) in the hotel of O.P.5 – License granted by the Government – Actionchallenged on the ground that the hotel is located within 30 meters from a school.Local MLA and Chairperson of the NAC recommended the ‘ON’ shop and Principal of the aboveschool submitted no objection for the same – State undertakes liquor trade in order to generate revenuein spite of the mandate under Article 47 of the Constitution of India and choose to relax the restrictionsunder Rule 34 (1) (d) – Held, since State has made appropriate consideration on the fact situation of thecase there is no lawful justification for this Court to interfere in the matter hence dismissed the writpetition.( Indrajit Mahanty, J & Raghubir Dash, J.)

CourtNews27SIBA PRASAD NAYAK-V- THE DIRECTOR, HEALTH SERVICE & ORS.W.P.(C) NO.1417 OF 2013 (Dt.20.02.2013)CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950 – ART.21.Right to life – Petitioner’s Son suffered from a debilitating disease – Duty of the Government toprovide necessary medical assistance to its citizens and employees.In this case petitioner’s Son suffered from the disease “Muscular Dystrophy” and his application forreferral certificate was rejected on the ground that the disease is not curable and “Stem-cell-theory” formuscular disease is still a research initiative not ethically approved method for treatment and experimentalor researched initiative does not fall within the meaning of the term “treatment” and the institution to whichthe reference has been sought was not duly approved by the State Government.Treatment cannot be deemed to apply only to cure but also it includes all steps taken in order tocure an injury or disease and would include all steps which would “arrest the disease from furtherdeterioration” – Held, direction issued to O.P.1 to 5 to issue referral certificate to the son of the petitionerwithin three days and O.P.6 is directed to sanction maximum limit of medical advance in favour of thepetitioner for the treatment of his son at Chaitanya Hospital, Chinchwad, Pune (Maharashtra) which is anapproved referral hospital permitted by the Government of India.( Indrajit Mahanty, J & Raghubir Dash, J.)RAJENDRA PATEL -V- STATE OF ORISSA.CRLA NO.228 OF 2009 (Dt.27.02.2013)PENAL CODE, 1860 – S.376.Rape – Rape is not merely a physical assault, it is often destructive of the whole personality ofthe victim and degrade the very soul of the helpless female – In this type of offence a conviction can befounded on the testimony of the prosecutrix alone and it is the duty of every Court to award propersentence having regard to the nature of the offence and the manner in which it was committed – Held,finding of the trial Court is confirmed except the age of the victim girl and the sentence is modified to theextent that the accused-appellant is sentenced to undergo imprisonment for the period already undergoneby him and to pay a fine of Rs.50,000/- which is to be paid to the victim.( Sanju Panda, J.)KONAPALU SURYANARAYANA -V- STATE OF ORISSACRLREV. NO.733 OF 2011 (Dt.01.03.2013)CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973 – S.228.Framing of charge – Court has power to shift and weigh the evidence to find out whether a primafacie case against the accused has been made out.Even if the petitioner had not touched the tainted currency notes kept on his table but the statementof witnesses clearly reveal the factum of demand and acceptance of bribe – Held, framing of chargesagainst the petitioner U/s.7, 13 (2) read with Section 13 (1) (d), P.C. Act by the impugned order cannotbe faulted with.( B. K. Nayak, J.)

28CourtNewsLAXMAN PRUSTY-V- STATE OF ORISSACRLREV. NO.742 OF 2012 (Dt.07.03.2013)CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973 – S.227.Petitioner alleged to have tampered his date of birth in service record – He retired in 1986 but F.I.R.lodged in 2002 – Initiation of Criminal Proceeding being barred Under Rule 7 (2) (c ) of Orissa Civil Service(Pension) Rules, 1992 he filed an application for discharge – Application rejected on the ground thatcharge already framed against the petitioner – Hence this revision.Criminal Proceeding itself being not maintainable, no charge could have been framed against thepetitioner, even though, cognizance has already been taken – Held, mere taking of cognizance does notdebar the Court to consider the question of maintainability of the proceeding at the time of hearing oncharge – Held, impugned order is set aside and the Criminal Proceeding is quashed.(B. K. Nayak, J.)DEBASIS ROUT –V- MANOJ KUMAR PARIDACRLREV. NO.20 OF 2012 (Dt.07.03.2013)NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT, 1881 – S.147.Offence U/s. 138 N.I. Act – Joint petition by the complainant and the accused for compounding ofthe offence – Held, such compounding can be made at any stage of the proceeding i.e. during appeal,revision or even before the Supreme Court.In this case complainant has already received the compensation amount of Rs.65,000/- and he hasno objection if order of conviction and sentence against the petitioner is set aside – Held, petition forcompounding the offence is allowed – Order of conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court is setaside and the petitioner is acquitted of the charge U/s.138 N.I. Act subject to deposit of Rs.8400/- by wayof cost with the Orissa State Legal Services Authority, Cuttack.(B. K. Nayak, J.)PRAKASH PATTNAIK-V- THE CHAIRMAN, P.N.B. & ANR.W.P.(C) NO.175 OF 2007 (Dt.12.03.2013)SERVICE LAW - Compassionate appointment – Object of the scheme is to help the family of theemployee dying in harness and leaving his family in penury without any means of livelihood – Held, it isimportant to assess the financial condition of the family of the deceased employee to determine theeligibility for compassionate appointment, which cannot be claimed as a matter of right.In this case the family of the petitioner received Rs.6.20 laks as terminal dues and Rs.3.57 lakson account of other investments and the family has owned a residential house besides a piece of landand as such the dependant of the deceased employee are not in penury, without any means of livelihood– Held, the Bank has rightly rejected the application of the petitioner for compassionate appointment.(M. M. Das, J & S.C. Parija, J.)RANJIT RANJAN NAYAK-V- STATE OF ODISHA & ORS.W.P.(C) NO.226 OF 2007 (Dt.12.03.2013)EDUCATION – Whether Diploma in Special Education (Mental Retardation) conducted byRehabilitation Council of India is equivalent to Certified Teachers (C.T.) qualification of Board of SecondaryEducation, Odisha – Held, Yes.(B. N. Mahapatra, J.)

CourtNews29INDIAN RED CROSS SOCIETY-V- BANKANIDHI MISHRAW.P.(C) NO.6890 OF 2012 (Dt.15.03.2013)A. PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, 1972 – S.4.Payment of Gratuity – Whether entitlement of an employee under the Act, 1972 can be curtailedby Rules, 2001 framed by the petitioner-society – Held, No.In this case O.P.1 served the petitioner-society as Director for more than 28 years – As per his lastdrawn salary he is entitled to gratuity of Rs.3,48,034 under the Act, 1972 but the petitioner-society paidhim only Rs,50,000/- as per Clause 28 (a) of the service Rules, 2001 framed by it – Held, statutoryentitlement available to an employee can not be curtailed by the petitioner-society by framing any Ruleof its own – There is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order passed by the Controlling Authorityunder the payment of Gratuity Act-cum-Labour Commissioner, Cuttack directing the petitioner to depositfurther amount of Rs,3,00,000/- with 10% interest P.A., calling for interference by this Court.B. PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, 1972 – S.1(3)(B).Whether the petitioner, Indian Red Cross Society Orissa Branch comes within the meaning of“establishment” U/s. 1 (3) (B) of 1972 Act – Held, Yes.The petitioner society sells blood, conducts different pathological/medical tests and collected feesfrom the customers – Held, petitioner comes within the meaning of establishment U/s.1 (3) (b) of the Act.C. PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, 1972 – S.4.Whether provisions of payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 is applicable to the employees of Indian RedCross Society – Held, Yes.(B. N. Mahapatra, J.)ISWAR CHANDRA DASH-V- FIRST ADDL. DIST. & SESSIONS JUDGE, CTC. & ORS.W.P.(CRL.) NO.279 OF 2013(Dt.25.03.2013)A. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973 – S.439 (2).Cancellation of bail – Conduct subsequent to release on bail and other supervening circumstancesare relevant.Once bail granted to an accused and application U/s.439 (2) Cr.P.C. filed before the said Court andthe Court finds that the accused while on bail has misused his liberty and has acted in such manner whichis prejudicial to the case of the prosecution, i.e. if the accused has attempted to gain over witnesses,has committed further criminal acts on the informant or any other person belonging to the prosecutionparty or has attempted to threaten the witnesses, the bail granted earlier to him can be cancelled by theCourt granting such bail.B. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973 – S.439 (2).Cancellation of bail – A bail order once granted can only be cancelled under the provisions ofSection 439 (2) Cr.P.C. and not otherwise.C. CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950 – ART.226.Writ petition to set aside the order granting bail – Questioning public accountability on the part ofthe learned Court below who granted such bail – Held, writ petition is not maintainable since remedyavailable to the petitioner to move appropriate application U/s.439 (2) Cr.P.C.(M. M. Das, J & B. N. Mahapatra, J. )

30CourtNewsMAJOR EVENTS1. A brief report on National Seminar & Conference held at Puri From 15 th -17 th February 2013As per decision of the Hon’ble Judicial Academy & Training Committee dt.09.01.2013, one day NationalSeminar on the subject ‘ Land Acquisition Law & two days National Conference on Environment vis-à-visMining Law’ were organized at Puri from 15 th -17 th 2013, to discuss and evaluate the Pros & Cons on theLand Acquisition Law, Environmental Law in relation to the Mining Law.The inauguration of the one day National Seminar was held on 15 th February 2013 by His Excellency ShriM.C. Bhandare, the Governor, State of Odisha in presence of the dignitaries. Similarly, the NationalConference was inaugurated by Hon’ble Shri Justice A.K. Patnaik, Judge, Supreme Court of India inpresence of Hon’ble Shri Justice V. Gopala Gowda, Judge, Supreme Court of India, Hon’ble Judges ofthe Orissa High Court and other High Courts. The Chairpersons of the Judicial academies of Tamil Nadu,Rajasthan & Chandigarh, apart from Judicial Officers of Nineteen States including the State of Odisha, theDirectors other state Academies and eminent Scientists, Professors and Administrative Officers from allpart of the Country have graced the occasion as well.In presence of the galaxy of legal luminaries at the dais including the Chairperson of Orissa JudicialAcademy and Hon’ble Judges of the Orissa High Court, both at National Seminar and Conference wereof grand success.2. Celebration of Republic Day.Republic Day was celebrated on 26.1.2013 in the High Court premises. Hon’ble Shri Justice Pradip KumarMohanty, the then Acting Chief Justice hoisted the National Flag in the Court premises. Hon’ble Judgesof the Court, Officers of the Court, Members of the Orissa High Court Bar association and Staff of the Courtgraced the said occasion.3. Opening of Special Track Courts to deal with offences against Women.Consequent upon the tragic incident of gang-rape and death of the victim girl in Delhi leaving an indeliblemark on the conscience of the nation, Special Track Courts of Sessions empowering the Registrar, CivilCourts in the State with the sessions power to try exclusively cases relating to offences against Women,have started functioning with effect from inbetween 4.2.2013 to 15.2.2013 in the District Headquarters.4. Inauguration of the Court Building at Soroda and Court of Addl. District Judge, Chhatrapur.The Court Building at Soroda and Court of Addl. District Judge at Chhatrapur was inaugurated by Hon’bleShri Justice Indrajit Mahanty, Judge, Orissa High Court on 23.2.2013 in presence of local Judicial Officersand Members of the Bar.–0–INFRASTRUCTURAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE JUDICIARYDURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2013-14The State Government in their Home Department have proposed to provide funds amounting to Rs.75,00,00,000/- under State Plan for infrastructural development of the Judiciary during the financial year 2013-14. Out of the said amount, a sum of Rs. 69,00,00,000/- has been ear-marked for non-residential projects andthe balance funds amounting to Rs. 6,00,00,000/- for residential projects. The current year budget includesconstruction of 15 numbers of District Court Buildings for newly created Judgeships and two other District CourtBuildings.

CourtNews31e-Courts Project in OdishaIn our State a Steering Committee under the chairmanship of Hon’ble Shri Justice M.M. Das and Hon’bleShri Justice I. Mahanty, Hon’ble Shri Justice S.C.Parija and Hon’ble Shri Justice S.K. Mishra as membersthereof, is monitoring the implementation of the e-Courts project with the assistance of the Central ProjectCoordinator, Shri R.K.Pattanaik.The scope of e-Courts project is to develop, deliver, install and implement automated decision making anddecision support system in the district and subordinate courts of the state with the help of e-Committee SupremeCourt of India.The objectives of the project are:To help judicial administrations of the courts in streamlining their day-to-day activities• To assist judicial administration in reducing the pendency of cases• To provide transparency of information to the litigants• To provide access to legal and judicial databases to the judges.The state judiciary, configured to 115 court complexes, consists of 423 courts situated in different partsof the state.The following progress have been achieved in the state under e-Courts project1. Site preparation of 115 Court complexes is completed.2. Delivery and installation of hardware have been progressively made.3. About 476 judicial officers are provided with laptops and printers.4. 41 nos. of Diesel Generator sets are already provided while further 48 nos. of Diesel Generator sets areordered to be delivered.5. 14 nos. of System Officers and 28 nos. of System Assistants have been deployed at District level toprovide the technical support.6. Successful data entry is going on at 86 Court Complexes.PRESENT STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF “E-COURTS PROJECT”No. of CourtComplexesDG SetDeliveredDG SetOrderedSite/LanSurveycompletedLanMaterialDeliveredLanMaterialInstalledHardware(PC)DeliveredHardware(PC)InstalledSoftwareRolloutData Entrystarted inCourtComplexes

32CourtNewsACTIVITIES OF ORISSA STATE LEGAL SERVICES AUTHORITYAt State LevelDuring the period from January, 2013 to March, 2013, 04 State Level Lok Adalats were held oneeach at Sambalpur, Jeypore, Nabarangpur, and Baripaada(Mayurbhanj) on 12.1.2013, 19.1.2013, 20.1.2013,and 9.3.2013 respectively, in which, in total 175 number of Motor Accident Claim Cases and 15 matrimonialcases have been settled/disposed of on conciliation. A sum of Rs.2,83,42,250/- has been awarded asCompensation in the above MACT cases.At High Court LevelDuring the above period, the High Court Legal Services Committees has organized a Mega LokAdalat on 19.1.2013 in the High Court Premises in which, total 116 number of cases have been disposedof which consisted of Motor Accident Claim Appeals-49, Land Acquisition Cases-20 and OJC/W.P.(c)-47.A sum of Rs.1,44,90,000/- has been awarded towards compensation in the above Motor Accident ClaimAppeals.At District & Taluk LevelsDuring the above period, 245 no.of District and Taluk Level Lok Adalats have been organized in theState of Odisha by the field units i.e. 30 District Legal Services Authorities and 73 Taluk Legal ServicesCommittees. In the above District and Taluk Level Lok Adalats, total 57,710 no.of cases have beendisposed of which consisted of Civil-870, Compoundable Criminal Cases-29,646, Revenue-23,298Matrimonial-14 Bank-3460, BSNL-333 , Labour-03 and MACT- 86. A sum of Rs.38,91,907/- towardsCriminal fine and Rs.72,88,907/- as Revenue have been collected in the said Lok Adalats. Further, a sumof Rs.1,84,02,786/- has been awarded towards compensation in the above Motor Accident Claim Cases.2. Permanent Lok Adalats(PUS)(U/s.22-B of the L.S.A.Act.,1987)During the above quarter, 438 number of cases relating to Public Utility Services were registeredin the Thirteen Permanent Lok Adalats, out of which, 371 no. of cases were disposed of.3. Activities of Mediation CentresDuring the above period, 197 no. of cases were referred by the different Courts to the MediationCentres of the State for mediation, out of which, 80 no.of cases are disposed of, where in 28 no.of casesmediation becomes successful.4. Legal Literacy/Awareness CampaignDuring the above quarter, the field units i.e 30 District Legal Services Authorities and 73 Taluk LegalServices Committees organized 208 no.of Legal Literacy/Awareness Camps in relation to women andchildren in need of care and protection, pre-natal sex selection and on Pre-Natal Diagnostic Technique(PNDT)Act, on the availability of different welfare and social security schemes, on women’s rights and violenceagainst women and legal literacy classes in jails on “Plea Bargaining” as per National Plan of Actionand Calendar for Activities drawn for the year, 2012-2013. In the above Camps, total 31,336 number ofpersons were benefited by attending in the said Literacy Camps.5. Legal Aid BeneficiariesFree Legal Aid and assistance has been provided to 1038 number of beneficiaries, which comprisedof SC-145, ST-88, OBC-57, Women- 410, Children-02, In-custody-142 and other weaker sections of theSociety- 194.

CourtNews33Hon’ble Chief Justice & Hon’ble Judges of Orissa High Courtparticipating Programmes/ Courses at the N.J.A., Bhopal and other placesSl. No.Names of the Hon’ble JudgesPeriodTopics1. Hon’ble Shri JusticeC.Nagappan, Chief Justice2. Hon’ble Shri JusticeP.K.Mohanty3. Hon’ble Shri JusticeM.M.Das4. Hon’ble Shri JusticeI.Mahanty21.3.201323.1.20139.2.20139.2.2013Administered the Oath toHis Excellency Dr. S.C.Jamir,the Governor of Odisha at Raj Bhawan,BhubaneswarAttended the meeting on Access toJustice for Marginalized Peopleat New DelhiAttended the meeting at the Hon’bleSupreme Court of Chairpersons of theState Judicial Academy and ComputerCommittee convened by Hon’bleMr. Justice M.B.Lokur, Judge,Supreme Court of India.Attended the meeting at the Hon’bleSupreme Court of Chairpersons of theState Judicial Academy and ComputerCommittee convened by Hon’bleMr. Justice M.B.Lokur, Judge,Supreme Court of India .ACTIVITIES OF HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE1. The 12th High Court Mega Lok Adalat was held on 19.1.2013 in which Hon’ble Shri Justice P.K.Mohanty,Executive Chairman, Orissa State Legal Services Authority, Hon’ble shri Justice M.M.Das, Chairman, HighCourt Legal Services Committee, Hon’ble Shri Justice B.N.Mahapatra, Hon’ble Shri Justice B.K.Nayak andHon’ble Shri Justice Raghubir Dash, Judges of the Hon’ble Court presided over the Adalat Benches. Inthe above Lok Adalat 116 cases are disposed of which includes MAC Appeals, Writ Petition and LandAcquisition cases by way of compromise. The General Insurance Companies agreed to pay Rs. 1,44,90,000/- (One Cror, forty-four lakhs, ninety thousand) only as compensation.2. During the period under report, 21 applicants have been provided with the benefit under the scheme of LegalAid and Advice by the High Court Legal Services Committee to file and defend their cases in the High Court.Similarly, 22 Legal Aid Counsels have been paid their honorarium.

34CourtNewsORISSA JUDICIAL ACADEMY, CUTTACKDETAILS OF PROGRAMME WITH NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS(RANKWISE) ORGANIZEDDURING THE PERIOD FROM 01.01.2013 TO 31.03.2013Sl. Date of Name of the programme No. of Officers/ PresentNo. programme(Rank Wise) NominatedParticipants1. 05 th & 06 th Management and Administration Skills for Judges. 25/24 D. J=02, ADJ=07,Jan 2013CJM=152. 19 th 20 th Judgment Writing and Communication 25/23 ADJ=5, Sr. C.J=11,Jan.2013 C.J =73. 15 th to 19 th Public Prosecutors 30/21 P.Ps & Addl. P.PsJan.20134. 15 th to 17 th National Seminar & Conference 95/86 Judicial Officers ofFeb 2013the State=45,Judicial Officers ofthe outside theState =415. 20 th & 21 st Court Development Plan with Administration Skills. 31/31 All Court Managers.Feb. 20136. 23 rd & 24 th G.R.C.O (Civil), C.F Act, Suit Valuation Act, 25/18 Sheristadar=09,Feb 2013 Stamp Act. BC=097. 23 rd & 24 th Two days Awareness-cum-training Prog. 20/20 SDJM =03, JMFC-Feb 2013 UBUNTU cum- CJs=17.8. 02 nd & 03 rd Court, Case Load and Case Management 25/22 D.J =04, ADJ =18Mar 20139. 7 th & 8 th Two Days Awareness-cum- Training Prog. 20/20 CJ(SD) =06,Mar.2013 UBUNTU SDJM= 03, JMFCcum-C.Js =1110. 9 th & 10 th Two days Awareness-cum-training Prog. 20/20 CJ(SD ) = 02,Mar.2013 UBUNTU CJM= 1,SDJM =06,JMFC-cum-C.Js =1111. 9 th & 10 th Judicial Conduct and Ethics 25/22 DJ = 02, ADJ = 04,Mar.2013 CJM = 1 CJ (SD) =07, SDJM = 05,C.Js=0312. 16 th & 17 th I.P.R Laws 25/23 D.J =07, ADJ =16Mar.201313. 23 rd & 24 th Plea Bargaining 25/16 SDJM = 06,Mar.2013 JMFC = 10

Inauguration of National Seminar on 'Land Acquisition Law' on 15.2.2013 at Puri by His ExcellencyShri Murlidhar Chandrakant Bhandare, the Governor of Odisha. Hon'ble Shri Justice R.K.Patra, formerChief Justice, Sikkim High Court, Hon'ble Shri Justice P.K.Misra, former Chief Justice Patna High Court,Hon'ble Shri Justice Bilal Nazki, former Chief Justice, Orissa High Court,Hon'ble Judges of Orissa High Court, Hon'ble Ms. Justice R.Banumathi, Judge, Madras High Court,Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dinesh Maheshwari, Judge, Rajasthan High Court, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Surya Kant,Judge, P&H High Court and Judicial Officers of different States attended the Seminar.

Inauguration of two days National Conference on 'Forest & Environment vis-à-vis Mining Law' on16.2.2013 & 17.2.2013 at Puri by Hon'ble Shri Justice A.K.Patnaik, Judge, Supreme Court of India inpresence of Hon'ble Shri Justice V.Gopala Gowda, Judge, Supreme Court of India, Hon'ble Shri JusticeA.K.Goel, Chief Justice Guwahati High Court, Hon'ble Shri Justice Kurian Joseph, the then Chief Justice,Himachal Pradesh High Court, Hon'ble Judges of Orissa High Court & Judicial Officers of different States.

NATIONAL SEMINAR & CONFERENCE HELD AT PURI FROM 15TH - 17TH FEBRUARY, 2013Group Photo on the occasion :Hon’ble Shri Justice A.K. Patnaik, Hon’ble Shri Justice V. Gopala Gowda, Judges of Supreme Court of India, Hon’ble Shri Justice Bilal Nazki, FormerChief Justice, Orissa High Court, Hon’ble Shri Justice P.K. Mohanty, the then Acting Chief Justice, Orissa High Court, Hon’ble Shri Justice M.M. Das,Hon’ble Shri Justice I. Mahanty, Hon’ble Kumari Justice Sanju Panda, Hon’ble Shri Justice B.N. Mahapatra, Hon’ble Shri Justice B.K. Patel, Hon’ble Shri JusticeP.K. Nayak, Hon’ble Shri Justice S.K. Mishra, Hon’ble Shri Justice C.R. Dash, Hon’ble Shri Justice B.K. Misra, Hon’ble Shri Justice Raghubir Dash, Judges ofOrissa High Court, Hon’ble Shri Justice Surya Kant, Judge, Punjab & Haryana High Court, Hon’ble Shri Justice Dinesh Maheshwari, Judge, Rajasthan HighCourt, Hon’ble Ms Justice R. Banumathi, Judge, Madras High Court, Hon’ble Shri Justice A.S. Naidu, Former Judge, Orissa High Court, Judicial Officers ofdifferent States (Nineteen States including Odisha), Directors of State Judicial Academies, Eminent Scientists, Professors.Printed at Graphic Art Offset Press, Cuttack-1