{"id":201703,"date":"2010-10-05T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-10-04T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashok-kumar-majhi-8-another-vs-unknown-on-5-october-2010"},"modified":"2018-05-12T09:16:03","modified_gmt":"2018-05-12T03:46:03","slug":"ashok-kumar-majhi-8-another-vs-unknown-on-5-october-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashok-kumar-majhi-8-another-vs-unknown-on-5-october-2010","title":{"rendered":"Ashok Kumar Majhi 8:. Another vs Unknown on 5 October, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Orissa High Court<\/div>\n
Ashok Kumar Majhi 8:. Another vs Unknown on 5 October, 2010<\/div>\n
HIGH COURT OF ORISSA: CUTTACK\n\nWP(Cl No. 12228 of 2010\nIn the matter of an application under Articles 226 8:. 227 of the\nConstitution of India\n\nAshok Kumar Majhi 8:. another .... .. Petitioners\n\nState of Orissa 8:, others .... .. Opp.Parties\n\nM \/ s Upendra Kumar Samal,\nC.D.Sahoo, S.P.Patra and\nM.R.Mohap'atra. ' '\n\nFor Petitioners\n\nFor Opp. Parties ' Mr. D.Panda, A.G.A.\n\nFor Intervenor Mr. Sanjit Mohan1:y,Sr.AdVocate\n\n_______ __L-_-____\n\nPRESENT:\n\nTI-IE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI V.GOPALA GOWDA\n\n3.\n85 77\n\nTHE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE INDRAJIT MAI-IAANTY.\n\nDate of hearing: 27.9.2010 Date of Judgment:  \/0 .2010\n\nI.Mahanty, J. In the present writ petition the petitioners herein claiming\n\nthemselves to be the social workers and villagers of village Boden in the\n\nDistrict of Nuapada in the State of Orissa have prayed for quashing of\n\nNotice No.248 dated 10.7.2010 issued by the Collector 82; District\n\n\n\nMagistrate, Nuapada for settlement of India Made Foreign Liquor Off\nshop (in short \"IMFL Off shop\") through lottery for the year 2010-11 at\nvillage Boden.\n\n2. Mr. U.K.0amal, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted\nthat a public notice Was issued by the Superintendent of iExcise of\nNuapadaion 11.11.2-009 inviting objections from public regarding the\nproposal of the State Government to grant exclusive privilege for\nopening of new IMFL Off shop for retail sale at village Boden and by the\nsaid notice objections were required to be \ufb01led on or before 26.11.2009.\nThe period indicatedin the notice for grant of exclusive privilege was\nfrom 1.0472010 to 31.00.2011. Pursuant to the aforesaid notice the\nChairman of Boden Panchayat Samiti, one Mr. Krushn\u00e9rsingh Majhi\nhas submitted an objection dated 21.1 1.2009 under 4AnneXure-4 stating\ntherein, that the village Boden is a backward tribal area Where the local\ninhabitants are fully depending upon agriculture _ and substantial\nnumber of them are living below the poverty line. Accordingly objection\nwas made to the opening of IMFL [Off shop, since it was likely to cause\n\nharm to the village people instead of their upliftment. It is' further\n\n1 submitted that by a further letter dated 23.12.2009, the Chairman of\n\nBoden Panchayat Samiti submitted another objection reiterating his\nearlier objection and also. stating that the Boden Panchayat Samiti and\n\nBoden Gram Panchayat had passed ,a resolution, to the effect that no\n\n\n\nforeign liquor shop should be opened at village Boden for the bene\ufb01t of\nthe people.\n\n3. Mr. Samal further submitted that the public notice inviting\nobjection dated 11.11.2009 under Annexure-3 did not satisfy the\nrequirement of Section 22 of the Bihar and Orissa Excise Act, 1915\nsince the notice failed to specify the \"locality\" and the \"local area\" within\nwhich the excise privilege was intended to be granted Was to be\nexercised.\n\n4. A further plea Was taken by the learned' counsel for the\npetitioners that, on an earlier occasion the Collector, Nuapada had\nissued public notice for opening of 'a new IMFL Off shop at village Boden\nfor the period from 1.04.2008 to 31.03. 2009 Vide public notice dated\n5.11.2007<\/pre>\n
 under Annexure-1 and since the objections were raised by
\nthe Panchayat, the State ‘Government had decided not to open the said
\nIMFL Off shop during the said year; It is submitted that the very
\nreasons which existed for not opening an IMFL Off shop at village
\nBoden in the district of Nuapada for the year 2008-2009, still continue
\nto exist as on date and therefore, the rejection of the objection raised by
\nthe Chairman of the Panchayat Samimit, Boden under Annexures-4
\nand  and the decision to go ahead for grant of exclusive privilege by
\nopening an IMFL Off shop at village Boden for the year 2010-11, vide<\/p>\n
notice dated 10.07.2010 under Annexure–6 is liable to be quashed.\n<\/p>\n
5. Mr. Samal further contended that assuming for the sake
\nargument that an IMFL Off shop was required to be opened at village
\nBoden, even then, the decision of the State’ Government to settle the
\nsaid IMFL Off shop through “lottery” was not in consonance Section
\n29(2)(a) of the Bihar and Orissa Excise Act, 1915, since, it was
\nstipulated therein that the State Government may grant -exclusive
\nprivilege either by “auction” or by calling “tender” or otherwise as the
\nState Government may, in the interest of excise revenue by general or
\nspecial order dir’ect..He further submits that there was no necessity for
\ndeciding to open an IMFL shop at Boden through “lottery”, as, holding of
\na lottery was not speci\ufb01cally permissible in terms of the aforesaid<\/p>\n
statutory stipulation under the Bihar 85 Orissa Excise Act, 1915.\n<\/p>\n
” 6. Mr. D.Panda, learned Additional Government Advocate<\/p>\n
appearing for the State responded to the aforesaid contentions by
\nstating at the outset that, the State had complied with all the
\nprocedural requirements prescribed under Bihar & Orissa Excise Act
\nfor the purpose of opening of an IMFL Off shop at village Boden.\n<\/p>\n
7. Both, the learned counsel appearing for the State as well as
\nMr. Sanjit Mohanty learned Senior Advocate appearing for the
\nintervenor submitted that the petitioners have no locus standi to \ufb01le the
\npresent writ petition as “public interest litigation”, since the petitioners<\/p>\n
have never \ufb01led any objection to the opening of an IMFL Off shop at<\/p>\n
village Boden. Apart from the above, the learned counsel for the
\nintervenor submitted that, the objection annexed as Annexure-4 dated
\n21.11.2009 \ufb01led by Sri Krushna Chandra Majhi, Chairman -of Boden<\/p>\n
Panchayat Samiti was duly considered and an enquiry was carried out<\/p>\n
by the Officers of Excise Department at the Collectorate and found no<\/p>\n
merit in the said objection. Apart from this Mr. Mohanty, learned
\ncounsel for the intervenor submitted that the self-same objector. i.e’.,
\nChairman of the Boden Panchayat Samiti had subsequently by letter
\ndated 23.12.2009 addressed to the Collector & District Magistrate,
\nNuapada admitting the requirement of an IMFL Off shop and suggesting
\nthat such IMFL Off shop retail licence may be granted. 0 I V<\/p>\n
8. Mr. Panda,’ learned Addl. Government Advocate, placed
\nreliance on the averments made by opposite parties 3 and 4 in the
\ncounter affidavit \ufb01led on their behalf by the Superintendent of
\nExcise, Nuapada and in particular the factual contention raised in
\nparagraphs–6 and 8. Relying on the same learned Additional
\nGovernment Advocate submitted that, it is a fact that the IMFL Off shop
\nat Boden was not sanctioned for the year 2008-09 apart from three
\nother proposed new IMFL shops at Hatibandha, Dharambandha and
\nUdiyanbandh of the self–same district for preservation of public peace.
\nHowever, as per the policy decision of the Government for the year<\/p>\n
2009-10, two numbers of new IMFL Off shops namely, Lakhna and<\/p>\n
Boden were proposed in the district. It is further averred that the
\nobjection \ufb01led by the Chairman of the Panchayat Samiti, Boden under
\nAnnexure-4 did not contain any resolution of the Gram Panchayat and
\nthe objections raised was duly enquired into by the Inspector of Excise
\nof Nuapada and the said objection letter was duly sent to the State
\nGovernment along with the views of the Collector after due enquiry
\nalong with the proposal vide letter No. 88 dated 15.3.2010′. In’ so far as
\nfurther alleged objection dated 23.12 2009 under Annexure-5 of the
\nChairman of Boden Panchayat Samiti is concerned, learned Additional
\nGovernment Advocate submitted that, the said objection having been
\nadmittedly sent after 26.11.2009, i.e. last date for receipt of objection,__
\nwas not considered since it was received after the last date \ufb01xed -for
\nreceipt of objection.\n<\/p>\n
9. Mr. Panda further ‘submitted that the intention’ of the State
\nGovernment behind granting permission for opening of an IMFL [Off
\nshop at village Boden Was not merely to raise excise revenue of the
\nState but was also aimed at stopping and\/ or preventing illicit
\ndistillation\/ boot legging in the local area and therefore, in the public
\ninterest it was required to open the IMFL Off shop for encouraging
\nlegitimate business and to assure unadulterated product to the
\nconsumers. ‘I-le, therefore, submitted that the decision of the State<\/p>\n
Government to open an IMFL Off shop at Boden was not only limited to<\/p>\n
protect the interest of revenue of the State but also to protect the
\ninterest of public health and safety and therefore, objection raised
\nunder Annexure-4 was not justi\ufb01ed. G<\/p>\n
10. Mr. Sanjit Mohanty, learned Sr. Advocate appearing for the
\ninterVenor- Ghanashyama Meher submitted that, the public notice
\ninviting public objection under Annexure-3 had duly. complied with the<\/p>\n
requirement of the Section \\22\/of the Bihar and-Orissa Excise Act read<\/p>\n
A with Rules 3 82; 4 of the Orissa Excise (Exclusive Privilege) Foreign<\/p>\n
Liquor Rules, 1989. Learned counsel further submitted that by way of _<\/p>\n
an g amendment in the year 2005 i.e. on 29.3.2005 the State
\nGovernment amended the Orissa Excise (Exclusive Privilege) Foreign
\nl.,iquor Rules, 1989. and incorporated a new rule therein numbered as
\nRule . 3-A in which it was stipulated: “Notwithstanding anything
\ncontained in rule-3, the Collector of the district shall \ufb01x the local area of<\/p>\n
the shop coterminous with the location of the shop.”\n<\/p>\n
10.1 Mr. Mohanty, learned Sr. Advocate further submittedthat the<\/p>\n
contention of the petitioners that grant of exclusive privilege through<\/p>\n
“lottery” was contrary\u00bb to the requirements of Section 29 (2)(a) of the
\nBihar & Orissa Excise Act, 1915 is wholly misconceived. It’is submitted
\nthat the settlement for grant of rights of exclusive privilege by the State
\nGovernment was permissible not only through “auction” or by calling<\/p>\n
upon “tenders” or otherwise as the State Government may, in the<\/p>\n
interest of excise revenue, by general or special order, direct. Learned
\ncounsel further submitted that pursuant to such authority being vested
\nin the Government, the State of Orissa issued an “Order by the Revenue
\n85 Excise Department on 23.4.1990” which was published in the
\nextraordinary gazette issue No. 538 of the Orissa Gazette, dated the
\n23rd April, 1990, which has since been amended from time to time. The
\nlearned Senior Counsel placed reliance on an amendment brought<\/p>\n
about to the said order of the State Government of ‘ Orissa vide<\/p>\n
amendment dated 28.4.2005 whereby, in specific terms and permission ,<\/p>\n
was granted for ‘settlement of IMFL Off shops “through a lottegg<\/p>\n
rocedure”. In terms of such procedure the State Government was duly
\nempowered to grant such exclusive privilege through lottery system in
\ncertain cases. Notice of the Court was also drawn to Form-A to the
\naforesaid amendment of the Government order which contains the<\/p>\n
description inviting application for settlement of IMFL Off shop through<\/p>\n
‘ “lottery” and particularly Clause–3(vii) of the said Form-A”, in which it<\/p>\n
has been noted:\n<\/p>\n
“The “State Government will not be responsible
\nfor providing the place for location of shops and it would
\nbe responsibility of the privilege holder to arrange
\nsuitable place and carry on the privilege granted to him.\n<\/p>\n
The place so arranged shall be free from objection from<\/p>\n
the public.”\n<\/p>\n
1 1. Mr. Mohanty further drew the attention of the Court to Form-
\nB of the aforesaid amendment of the Government order and stated that,
\nthe intervenor and forty–one other individuals had applied for grant of
\nlicence for opening of IMFL Off shop at village Boden through “lottery”
\nsystem and accordingly, the intervenor was found to be successful in
\nsuch lottery and became entitled for grant of such exclusive privilege.
\nMr. Mohanty further submitted that, no objection against grant of
\nexclusive privilege by “lottery” ought to be entertained, since the same is
\nin consonance with the Government Order issued for such purposes
\nand as amended from time to time as quoted hereinabove. He further
\nsubmitted that in the present case no challenge has been made by the
\npetitioners to the Order of the State Government dated 23.04. 1990’or to
\nthe subsequent amendments including. the amendment dated
\n28.04.2005. Accordingly, he submitted that since no challenge has
\nbeen made to the above, petitioners’ objection against grant of exclusive
\nprivilege through “lottery” is wholly baseless and deserves to be rejected
\nout right. It is further submitted that even though; the intervenor was
\nfound successful in the lottery held for the purpose of identi\ufb01cation of
\nan exclusive privilege holder for an IMFL Off shop at village Boden in
\nthe district of Nuapada since 23.07.2010 due to an interim order
\npassed by this Court in the present proceeding, the intervenor has not<\/p>\n
been able to operate the same and prays for dismissal of the Writ<\/p>\n
10<\/span><\/p>\n
petition and vacation of the interim orders in order to operate exclusive
\nprivilege. I<\/p>\n
12. Mr. Samal, learned counsel for the _petitioners placed reliance
\non the judgment of this Court in the case of Sarat Kumar Sahu 82;
\nanother v. Collector, Cuttack and another, 73 (1992) CLT 834(para-\n<\/p>\n
6) in order to support his contention that the “locality” as well as “local
\narea”, needs to be declared in the public notice. We are of the
\nconsidered View that the aforesaid judgment would have no application<\/p>\n
to the present case, since an amendment was made’ on 29.03.2005 to<\/p>\n
‘9 the Orissa Excise (Exclusive Privilege) Foreign Liquor Rules, 1989,<\/p>\n
introducing Rule–3-A’. thereof. In View of such amendment to the<\/p>\n
aforesaid rules, which came into force subsequent to the aforesaid
\ndecision referred hereinabove and on perusing Annexure–3, We are of
\nthe considered view that the said public notice satis\ufb01es the
\nrequirements of 1989 Rules referred to herein above. Hence,” the<\/p>\n
judgment relied upon by the petitioners is of no assistance. The<\/p>\n
petitioners also placed reliance on a judgment of the Honfble Supreme.\n<\/p>\n
Court in the case of S.N. Mukherjee v. Union of India, AIR<\/a> 1990 SC
\n1984, in particular, paragraphs 38 and 39 thereof, in order to
\nsubstantiate his stand that, the “reasons” need to be recorded While<\/p>\n
rejecting an objection made to opening of an IMFL Off shop.\n<\/p>\n
11<\/span><\/p>\n
13. In this regard, reliance was placed by the learned Senior
\nCounsel for the intervenor on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme<\/p>\n
Court in the case of Mohinder Singh Gill and another V. The Chief<\/p>\n
Election Commissioner, New Delhi, AIR 1978 SC 851 and submitted<\/p>\n
that the “reasons for rejecting’ objection raised by the Chairman of
\nBoden Panchayat Samiti are available in the records of the proceedings
\nof the Collector\/ State Governmentibasing uiponithe enquiry made by
\nthe Collector through the Excise Inspector and therefore, reasons being<\/p>\n
in existence in the records of the State can also be ‘referred to and<\/p>\n
therefore this contention of the petitioners is rejected.\n<\/p>\n
14. In this connection it would be I appropriate to quote the
\nrelevant portions from the inquiry report submitted by the Inspector of<\/p>\n
Excise, Nuapada. They are extracted below:\n<\/p>\n
“The villagers of Boden G.P. have \ufb01led objection
\npetition praying for not opening I.M.F.L. shop at Boden. On
\nmy inquiry thoroughly and I have ascertained that the Boden
\nis a block headquarters having \ufb02oating population as about 4
\nto 5 thousand per day. There is also no any kind of l.M.F.C.
\nshops at Boden Block are and alsono such I.M.F.L. shop near
\nabout 30 Kms distance from Boden. There is also feasibility
\nfor the opening of a I.M.F.L. shop at Boden for the interest of
\nGovernment revenue and to avoid future complicacy.\n<\/p>\n
, The Chairman, Panchayat Samit, Boden has filed ‘
\nhis objection in his letter No. 282 dated 27.11.09 not to open
\nI.M.F.L. shop at Boden. On inquiry of the petition, I have
\nphysically found that the objection \ufb01led by him is quite
\nbaseless. Also in the past, I have personally along with my
\nSuperintendent, both of us went to his native place on
\n09.08.09 and contacted with him in this respect. He has<\/p>\n
12<\/span><\/p>\n
submitted Written statement before us stating that he has got
\nno objection in case of opening of new I.M.F.L. shop there.”\n<\/p>\n
15. Apart from the above, learned Additional Government
\nAdvocate also-referred to para-8 of the counter af\ufb01davit vvhich provide
\nthe reasons for which the State Government rejected the \/objection
\nraised by the objectors. Accordingly, after perusing the records of the
\ncase provided to us by the learned counsel for the ‘State, we \ufb01nd that
\nadequate andcogent reasons exist in the record to justify the decision
\nof the State Government to open an IMFL Off shop at v\ufb02lage Boden in
\nthe district of Nuapada and \ufb01nd no \u00abmerit in the contention ‘raised by
\nthe petitioners. ‘ A<\/p>\n
16. Therefore, we \ufb01nd no merit in the present Writ petition and
\naccordingly, direct dismissal of the same and vacate all the interim<\/p>\n
orders. In view of the judgment passedtoday in this writ petition, all the<\/p>\n
misc. cases stand disposed of. ‘ , ,_ V V _m <\/p>\n
j  .9 “‘VlC9’l\/\\4arA\u00bblyJ,T.’<\/p>\n
94 ~ C\/CL’\u20ac(s’ 7v247Due~<\/p>\n
MAW.\n<\/p>\n
my<\/p>\n
V.Gopala Gowda, C.J. I agree.\n<\/p>\n
”’\\*6”””<\/p>\n
ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK
\nW October,20lO \/AKD<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Orissa High Court Ashok Kumar Majhi 8:. Another vs Unknown on 5 October, 2010 HIGH COURT OF ORISSA: CUTTACK WP(Cl No. 12228 of 2010 In the matter of an application under Articles 226 8:. 227 of the Constitution of India Ashok Kumar Majhi 8:. another …. .. Petitioners State of Orissa 8:, others …. .. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,25],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-201703","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-orissa-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nAshok Kumar Majhi 8:. Another vs Unknown on 5 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashok-kumar-majhi-8-another-vs-unknown-on-5-october-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Ashok Kumar Majhi 8:. Another vs Unknown on 5 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashok-kumar-majhi-8-another-vs-unknown-on-5-october-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-10-04T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-05-12T03:46:03+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"14 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ashok-kumar-majhi-8-another-vs-unknown-on-5-october-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ashok-kumar-majhi-8-another-vs-unknown-on-5-october-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Ashok Kumar Majhi 8:. Another vs Unknown on 5 October, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-12T03:46:03+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ashok-kumar-majhi-8-another-vs-unknown-on-5-october-2010\"},\"wordCount\":2244,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Orissa High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ashok-kumar-majhi-8-another-vs-unknown-on-5-october-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ashok-kumar-majhi-8-another-vs-unknown-on-5-october-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ashok-kumar-majhi-8-another-vs-unknown-on-5-october-2010\",\"name\":\"Ashok Kumar Majhi 8:. Another vs Unknown on 5 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-12T03:46:03+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ashok-kumar-majhi-8-another-vs-unknown-on-5-october-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ashok-kumar-majhi-8-another-vs-unknown-on-5-october-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ashok-kumar-majhi-8-another-vs-unknown-on-5-october-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Ashok Kumar Majhi 8:. Another vs Unknown on 5 October, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Ashok Kumar Majhi 8:. Another vs Unknown on 5 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashok-kumar-majhi-8-another-vs-unknown-on-5-october-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ashok Kumar Majhi 8:. Another vs Unknown on 5 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashok-kumar-majhi-8-another-vs-unknown-on-5-october-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-10-04T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-05-12T03:46:03+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"14 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashok-kumar-majhi-8-another-vs-unknown-on-5-october-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashok-kumar-majhi-8-another-vs-unknown-on-5-october-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Ashok Kumar Majhi 8:. Another vs Unknown on 5 October, 2010","datePublished":"2010-10-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-12T03:46:03+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashok-kumar-majhi-8-another-vs-unknown-on-5-october-2010"},"wordCount":2244,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Orissa High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashok-kumar-majhi-8-another-vs-unknown-on-5-october-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashok-kumar-majhi-8-another-vs-unknown-on-5-october-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashok-kumar-majhi-8-another-vs-unknown-on-5-october-2010","name":"Ashok Kumar Majhi 8:. Another vs Unknown on 5 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-10-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-12T03:46:03+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashok-kumar-majhi-8-another-vs-unknown-on-5-october-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashok-kumar-majhi-8-another-vs-unknown-on-5-october-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ashok-kumar-majhi-8-another-vs-unknown-on-5-october-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Ashok Kumar Majhi 8:. Another vs Unknown on 5 October, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/201703","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=201703"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/201703\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=201703"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=201703"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=201703"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}