The Orissa High Court on Thursday refused to issue a direct direction to the Tahasildar, Kalimela, to remove the name of a deceased person from the land Record-of-Rights (RoR), saying such correction must follow the proper legal process through mutation proceedings.
The court was hearing a petition filed by Jayanti Biswas and others seeking deletion of Laxman Biswas’ name from the RoR related to land recorded under Khata No.181/61 in Mouza-Erbanpali, Malkangiri district.
Read also:- Supreme Court Questions West Bengal Voter Roll Revision, Seeks Unified Reply from Election Commission
Background of the Case
The petitioners approached the High Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, requesting the court to direct the Tahasildar to delete Laxman Biswas’ name from the RoR on the ground that he had already expired.
They argued that since the recorded tenant was no longer alive, his name should not continue in the official land record.
The State of Odisha was represented through the Additional Standing Counsel.
Court Observation
Justice Ananda Chandra Behera noted that deletion of a recorded tenant’s name from the RoR due to death is not an automatic change that can be ordered straightaway through a writ petition.
Read also:- Jharkhand High Court Grants Divorce to Wife, Calls Blackmail Using Private Photos ‘Mental Cruelty’
The High Court highlighted that the law requires the interested party to initiate a mutation case, after which the Tahasildar must conduct an enquiry and pass an order based on facts and records.
In court, the judge observed in substance that, “for deletion of the name of a recorded tenant… on the ground of his/her death, a Mutation Case is to be registered… and then, an enquiry is to be conducted by the Tahasildar.”
The bench made it clear that without following these steps, the High Court could not pass what it described as a blanket direction ordering the Tahasildar to simply remove the name from the RoR.
As the court put it, “High Court cannot pass a blanket order… because… some formalities as per law are required to be made… through a Mutation Proceeding.”
Read also:- Delhi High Court Refuses Arrest Protection to Lawyer Accused of Rape Despite Settlement Claims
Decision
The High Court held that the writ petition could not be allowed fully, since the petitioners had to first follow the mutation procedure before the Tahasildar.
However, the court granted partial relief by giving liberty to the petitioners to move the Tahasildar with a proper application.
Accordingly, the court ordered that:
- The petitioners may file an application before the Tahasildar, Kalimela for deletion/exclusion of the deceased tenant’s name from the RoR.
- On receiving such an application, the Tahasildar shall register a Mutation Case.
- The Tahasildar shall conduct an enquiry and then pass necessary orders as per law.
With these directions, the writ petition was allowed in part and disposed of finally.
Case Title: Jayanti Biswas & Others vs State of Odisha & Others
Case No.: WP(C) No.35230 of 2025
Case Type: Writ Petition (Civil)
Decision Date: 08 January 2026
