SOMYAKANTA THATOI vs COLLECTOR, JAJPUR — WP(C)/5182/2021

Case under Constitution of India, 1950 Section 226,227. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 31st March 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: ODHC010102272021

Filing Number

WP(C)/5182/2021

Filing Date

09-Feb-2021

Registration No

WP(C)/5182/2021

Registration Date

11-Feb-2021

Judge

Mr. Justice Chittaranjan Dash

Coram

Mr. Justice Chittaranjan Dash

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

ORDINARY CIVIL MATTER ( 28 )

Judicial Branch

Civil Section

Decision Date

31-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Last updated 26-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India, 1950 Section 226,227

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SOMYAKANTA THATOI

    Adv. GANESH PRASAD SAMAL,S.K.BISWAL,S.K.BISWAL, B.LENKA, P.SENAPATI, P.MUDULI,S.K.BISWAL

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.COLLECTOR, JAJPUR

  2. 2.PROJECT DIRECTOR, DRDA, JAJPUR

  3. 3.EE, DRAINAGE DIV.

  4. 4.TAHASILDAR, BINJHARPUR

  5. 5.BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 31-Mar-2026

    Mr. Justice Chittaranjan DashView PDF

    The High Court of Orissa dismissed the writ petition as infructuous, finding that no surviving cause of action existed between the filing date and the order date regarding the petitioner's challenge to drain digging on his land in Jajpur district. The court noted the petitioner's apparent lack of interest in pursuing the matter, though permitted revival of the application if a fresh cause of action arises. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 31-Mar-2026

    For Orders

    Mr. Justice Chittaranjan Dash

  4. 09-Feb-2021

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP(C)/5182/2021

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Orissa dismissed the writ petition as infructuous, finding that no surviving cause of action existed between the filing date and the order date regarding the petitioner's challenge to drain digging on his land in Jajpur district. The court noted the petitioner's apparent lack of interest in pursuing the matter, though permitted revival of the application if a fresh cause of action arises. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case