SUBRAT ROUT @ SUBRAT KUMAR ROUT vs STATE OF ORISSA — WP(C)/8144/2026

Case under Constitution of India, 1950 Section 226,227. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 24th March 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: ODHC010172032026

e-Filing Number

07-03-2026

Filing Number

WP(C)/10045/2026

Filing Date

07-Mar-2026

Registration No

WP(C)/8144/2026

Registration Date

13-Mar-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Biraja Prasanna Satapathy

Coram

Mr. Justice Biraja Prasanna Satapathy

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

COMPENSATION MATTER ( 7 )

Judicial Branch

Civil Section

Decision Date

24-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Last updated 09-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India, 1950 Section 226,227

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SUBRAT ROUT @ SUBRAT KUMAR ROUT

    Adv. PANCHANAN PANIGRAHI

  2. 2.DIPTI ROUT

  3. 3.SULOCHANA ROUT

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF ORISSA

  2. 2.THE COLLECTOR CUM DIST.MAGISTRATE, DHENKANAL

  3. 3.OPTCL, MD, JANAPATH, BHUBANESWAR

  4. 4.OPTCL, D.G.M., (ELECTRICAL), EHT (PROJECTS) DIVISION, ANGUL

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 24-Mar-2026

    Mr. Justice Biraja Prasanna SatapathyView PDF

    The High Court of Orissa disposed of the writ petition without deciding the merits of the case. The court directed Opposite Party No.2 to consider and dispose of the petitioners' representation regarding compensation for installation of a 400 KV transmission tower on their land within three months, in accordance with law, with communication to the petitioner. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 24-Mar-2026

    Fresh Admission

    Mr. Justice Biraja Prasanna Satapathy

  4. 07-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP(C)/8144/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Orissa disposed of the writ petition without deciding the merits of the case. The court directed Opposite Party No.2 to consider and dispose of the petitioners' representation regarding compensation for installation of a 400 KV transmission tower on their land within three months, in accordance with law, with communication to the petitioner. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case