{"id":46235,"date":"2008-12-05T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-12-04T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudarsan-sahu-and-others-vs-unknown-on-5-december-2008"},"modified":"2016-01-02T13:11:11","modified_gmt":"2016-01-02T07:41:11","slug":"sudarsan-sahu-and-others-vs-unknown-on-5-december-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudarsan-sahu-and-others-vs-unknown-on-5-december-2008","title":{"rendered":"Sudarsan Sahu And Others vs Unknown on 5 December, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Orissa High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Sudarsan Sahu And Others vs Unknown on 5 December, 2008<\/div>\n<pre>THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA : CUTTACK\n\nOriginal Jurisdiction Case No.1814 of 1996\n\nIn the matter of an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the\nConstitution of India.\n\nSudarsan Sahu and others .... .. Petitioners\n--Versus--\nState of Orissa and others .... .. Opp. Parties\nFor Petitioners : M \/ s. Dayananda Mohapatra,\nP. Mohanty 85\nP.K.Mohapatra.\nFor Opp. Parties : Addl. Government Advocate.\nP R E S E N T :\n\nTHE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDRAJIT MAHANTY.\n\nDate of hearing : 12.11.2008 Date of Judgment :O5.12.2008\n\nI. Mahanty, J. The petitioner in this Writ application has sought to challenge\n' the order dated 15th July 1995 passed by the Member Board of\nRevenue, Orissa in O.L.R. Revision Case No.40 of 1994. In the\n\nimpugned revisional order, the Member Board of Revenue purportedly\n\nsought to exercise its revisional jurisdiction vested in it under Section A\n\n59(2) of the O.L.R. Act, 1960 on a reference made by the learned\nAdditional District Magistrate, Angul against the orders passed by the\n\n\n\nlearned Revenue Officer, Chhendipada dated 17.10.1990 and 8.7.1993\nin O.L.R. case No.39 of 1973.\n2- The Member Board of Revenue has sought to exercise its\nl\"\u20acViSiOnal jurisdiction over the orders passed by the Revenue Officer,\nChhendipada in O.L.R. Case No.39 of 1973, purportedly on two\ngrounds;\ni) That the enquiry conducted by the Revenue Officer on\n10.10.1990<\/pre>\n<p> is contrary to the direction of this Court<br \/>\npassed in O.J.C. No.877 of 1984 dated 4.1.1990.\n<\/p>\n<p>ii) That the Revenue Officer had examined the evidence as<br \/>\nwell as the report of the local enquiry made on<br \/>\n26.8.1976 and having found that the land in question<br \/>\nwere in joint cultivation, such a \ufb01nding binds the<br \/>\nparties and the later enquiry conducted by the Revenue<br \/>\nOfficer in 1990 holding that Sudarsan Sahoo was living<\/p>\n<p>separately from his father, cannot be accepted.\n<\/p>\n<p>3- Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners,<\/p>\n<p>inter 3113, contended that neither of the grounds on which, the learned<\/p>\n<p>authority and revisional authority under Annexures 1, 2 and 3<\/p>\n<p>respectively and directed as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;The matter will now go back to the Revenue<br \/>\nOfficer to the stage as it was prior to 27.8.1976. It is<br \/>\nmade clear that the petitioner will not be afforded any<br \/>\nfurther opportunity of adducing evidence, but will only<br \/>\nbe heard in the matter and, thereafter, the final order<\/p>\n<p>_ will be passed.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this<br \/>\ndirection of this Court was followed both in letter as well as in spirit. The<br \/>\nRevenue Officer, on remand by this Court, perused the order sheet<br \/>\nmaintained by him in O.L.R. Case No.39 of 1973. In the said order sheet,<br \/>\nit appears that by order dated 10.5.1976, the Revenue Officer had<br \/>\ndirected to put up the matter on 15.5.1976 for local enquiry. On<br \/>\n15.5.1976 the Revenue Officer being otherwise busy, adjourned the<br \/>\nmatter to 16.7.1976. On 16.7.1976, the Revenue Officer noted that<br \/>\nvarious documents had not been produced by the objector and directed<br \/>\nthe Amin to carry out a spot visit and directed the matter to be put up on<br \/>\n22.8.1976. On 22.8.1976, the Revenue Officer perused the report of the<br \/>\nAmin and directed that he shall carry out the local enquiry on 26.8.1976.<br \/>\nThe order sheet does not indicate any order and has been passed on<br \/>\n26.8.1976 or as to whether any local enquiry was conducted by the<br \/>\nRevenue Officer or not and instead, the order dated 27.8.1976 was the<br \/>\nfinal order by which the Revenue Officer disposed of the objection made<br \/>\nby the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n<p>Learned counsel for the petitioners drawing attention of the<br \/>\nCourt to the aforesaid orders of the Revenue Officer stated that since this<br \/>\nCourt in O.J.C. No.877 of 1984 directed that the matter will go back to<br \/>\nthe stage as it was prior to 27.8.1976 and from records, the Revenue<br \/>\nOfficer having found that in fact, no enquiry had taken place by the<br \/>\nRevenue Officer, therefore, in compliance of the directions of this Court,<br \/>\nconsequently conducted the local enquiry on 10.10.1990 and passed final<br \/>\norders thereto on 17.10.1990.\n<\/p>\n<p>5. Sri Mohapatra, learned counsel for the petitioner further<br \/>\nsubmitted that in terms of Section 43(2) of O.L.R. Act, 1960, the Revenue<br \/>\nOfficer has the authority in law to make &#8220;such enquiries as he may deem<br \/>\nnecessary&#8221; and since the earlier Revenue Officer had passed final orders<\/p>\n<p>on 27.8.1976 without conducting the local enquiry on 26.8.1976 as he<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">1<\/span><\/p>\n<p>had himself directed, after the Revenue Officer&#8217;s order dated 27.8.1976<br \/>\nwas quashed by this Court in O.J.C. No.877 of 1984, the Revenue Officer<br \/>\nnot only required to comply with the order of the High Court but also to<br \/>\nact in terms of the Section 43(2) of the O.L.R. Act for the purpose of<br \/>\nconducting an enquiry. Therefore, Mr. Mohapatra submitted that no<br \/>\nobjection could have been raised against the enquiry being conducted by<br \/>\nthe Revenue Officer after the order of remand of the High Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>The next point advanced by Mr. Mohapatra was that, it was<br \/>\nthe duty of Revenue Officer to ascertain as to whether there has been any<br \/>\n&#8220;separation in status&#8221; in the family of the ceiling holder. In this respect,<br \/>\nMr. Mohapatra placed reliance upon the judgment of this Court in the<br \/>\ncase of Ramnarayan Ram 85 others v. Revenue Officer-cum-<br \/>\nTahasildar, Darpan 85 others, 71 (1991) C.L.T. 843, in which this Court<br \/>\ncame to observe as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8221; In a ceiling surplus proceeding, it is the duty of the Revenue<br \/>\nOf\ufb01cer to find out the extent of excess land held by the ceiling&#8211;holder on<br \/>\nthe commencement of President&#8217;s Act 17 of 1973 which came into force<br \/>\non 2nd October 1973. In so deciding, he is to exclude the land hold by the<br \/>\nmajor married and separated sons of the ceiling~holder who were<br \/>\nseparated by partition or otherwise by 26th September, 1970 and if it is a<br \/>\ncase of partition, what land fell to their share in the partition would be<br \/>\nexcluded.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>6. Mr. Swain, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate on behalf of the<\/p>\n<p>&#8216; State, on the other hand, submitted that the father of the present<\/p>\n<p>petitioner no.&#8211;1 Sri Bidyadhar Sahu had passed away in the year 1986,<br \/>\ni.e. after the filing of the O.J.C. 877 of 1984 but much before its disposal<br \/>\nby the High Court on 4.1.1990. Learned counsel submitted that it was<br \/>\nthe obligation of the legal heirs of Late Bidyadhar Sahu (present<br \/>\npetitioners) to have brought this factto the notice of this Court but on<\/p>\n<p>remand from this Court, the legal heirs and successors of Late Bidyadhar<\/p>\n<p>Sahu (present petitioners) entered appearance before the Revenue Officer<br \/>\nand the Revenue Officer was required to act as per the direction given by<br \/>\nthis Court in the earlier writ application and not to conduct any enquiry,<br \/>\ninstead of re-hearing the matter based on evidence already on record.\n<\/p>\n<p>7. In consideration of the submissions made by the learned<br \/>\ncounsel for the parties, I am of the considered view that the judgment of<br \/>\nthis Court in O.J.C. No.877 of 1984 clearly directed the Revenue Officer<br \/>\nto go back to the stage as it was prior to 27.8.1976. On a perusal of the<br \/>\norder sheet maintained in O.L.R. Case No.39 of 1973 by the Revenue<br \/>\nOfficer, it is clear that although the Revenue Officer had himself decided<br \/>\nto conduct a local enquiry by an order dated 22.8.1976 scheduled to be<br \/>\nheld on 26.8.1976, no evidence on record exists as to whether such an<br \/>\nenquiry was in fact carried out or not, nor do any record exists any such<br \/>\nenquiry. On the other hand, on the very next day, i.e., 27.8.1976 final<br \/>\norders were passed by the Revenue Officer which had been quashed by<br \/>\nthis Court in the earlier O.J.C. Therefore, the true import of the direction<br \/>\nof the High Court was to put the case back to the stage prior to<br \/>\n27.8.1976, i.e., 26.8.1976. 26.8.1976 was the date in which enquiry was<br \/>\noriginally scheduled to be held but admittedly, was not held. Therefore,<br \/>\non remand, I am of the View that the Revenue Officer by further order<br \/>\ndated 10.10.1990 visited the spot; contacted the head of the family;<br \/>\noffered an opportunity of hearing; contacted other persons of the locality<br \/>\nand came to the conclusion that the earlier report of the Amin which had<br \/>\nbeen \ufb01led before him on 12.9.1990 was in order and was therefore,<br \/>\naffirmed with regard to the genealogy. Further in order dated 17.10.1990,<br \/>\nfinding orders were passed holding that the landholder is entitled to 18<br \/>\nstandard acres according to the number of family members and,<\/p>\n<p>therefore, there was no ceiling surplus land in this proceeding and<\/p>\n<p>accordingly, was dropped. Thus, I find that the Revenue Officer has acted 7<\/p>\n<p>in consonance with the earlier directions of this Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>8. From Section 43(2) of the O.L.R. Act, 1960, it is further clear<br \/>\nthat the Revenue Officer has the authority in law vested in him to make<br \/>\nsuch enquiries as he may deem necessary. I am of the view that this<br \/>\nauthority vested in the Revenue Officer, cannot in any manner to be given<br \/>\na restrictive meaning but deserves to be allowed to be exercised in the<br \/>\nwidest manner.\n<\/p>\n<p>9. In the present case, the Revenue Officer at first directed the<br \/>\nAmin to carry out an enquiry Vide order dated 17.8.1990 and after the<br \/>\nreport of the Amin was submitted before the court and prior accepting the<br \/>\nAmin&#8217;s report, the Revenue Officer made personal enquiry at the spot and<br \/>\ninterviewed the head of the family as well as neighbours in the locality<br \/>\nand accordingly, affirmed the Amin&#8217;s report with regard to genealogy.<br \/>\nHence, I find no error or any violation of statutory obligations on the part<br \/>\nof the Revenue Officer to warrant any interference whatsoever and far less<br \/>\nto warrant any interference under Sections 59(2) of the O.L.R. Act, 1960.<br \/>\nIn so far as the issue of partition is concerned, it would be<br \/>\nnecessary to note herein that the \ufb01nding of &#8220;prior partition&#8221; by the<br \/>\n&#8220;Revenue Officer&#8221; is a matter of -fact and record and based on the Amin&#8217;s<br \/>\nreport as well as the Revenue Officer&#8217;s own local enquiry. No evidence<br \/>\nwhatsoever to the contrary was pointed by the learned Addl. Govt.<br \/>\nAdvocate to controvert such a fact. Reliance placed by the Member Board<br \/>\nof Revenue, on an observation made in an order dated 29.6.1978 (which<br \/>\nhas been quashed earlier by this Court in O.J.C. No.877 of 1984), cannot<br \/>\nbe much relevance, especially since, as noted hereinabove, no enquiry<br \/>\nhad been conducted by the earlier Revenue Officer on 26.8.1976 as had<br \/>\nbeen directed by him and, therefore, any findings reached earlier must be<br \/>\ndeemed to have been based on no evidence, and cannot serve any useful<\/p>\n<p>purpose at all.\n<\/p>\n<p>10. Accordingly, the writ application is allowed and the order of<br \/>\nthe Member Board of Revenue dated 15th July, 1995 in O.L.R. Revision<br \/>\nCase No.40 of 1994 is quashed and the order of the Revenue Officer,<br \/>\nChhendipada dated 17.10.1990 in O.L.R. Case No.39 of 1973 is affirmed.\n<\/p>\n<p>No costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>ORISSA I-IIIJGH COURT; CUTTACK<br \/>\n5,5 P, 543 ,2008\/ RKS<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Orissa High Court Sudarsan Sahu And Others vs Unknown on 5 December, 2008 THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA : CUTTACK Original Jurisdiction Case No.1814 of 1996 In the matter of an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. Sudarsan Sahu and others &#8230;. .. Petitioners &#8211;Versus&#8211; State of Orissa and others [&hellip;]<\/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-46235","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-orissa-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Sudarsan Sahu And Others vs Unknown on 5 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/sudarsan-sahu-and-others-vs-unknown-on-5-december-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sudarsan Sahu And Others vs Unknown on 5 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudarsan-sahu-and-others-vs-unknown-on-5-december-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-12-04T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-01-02T07:41:11+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sudarsan-sahu-and-others-vs-unknown-on-5-december-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sudarsan-sahu-and-others-vs-unknown-on-5-december-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sudarsan Sahu And Others vs Unknown on 5 December, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-12-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-02T07:41:11+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sudarsan-sahu-and-others-vs-unknown-on-5-december-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1597,\"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\\\/sudarsan-sahu-and-others-vs-unknown-on-5-december-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sudarsan-sahu-and-others-vs-unknown-on-5-december-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sudarsan-sahu-and-others-vs-unknown-on-5-december-2008\",\"name\":\"Sudarsan Sahu And Others vs Unknown on 5 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-12-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-02T07:41:11+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sudarsan-sahu-and-others-vs-unknown-on-5-december-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sudarsan-sahu-and-others-vs-unknown-on-5-december-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sudarsan-sahu-and-others-vs-unknown-on-5-december-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sudarsan Sahu And Others vs Unknown on 5 December, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"Sudarsan Sahu And Others vs Unknown on 5 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/sudarsan-sahu-and-others-vs-unknown-on-5-december-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sudarsan Sahu And Others vs Unknown on 5 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudarsan-sahu-and-others-vs-unknown-on-5-december-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-12-04T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-01-02T07:41:11+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudarsan-sahu-and-others-vs-unknown-on-5-december-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudarsan-sahu-and-others-vs-unknown-on-5-december-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sudarsan Sahu And Others vs Unknown on 5 December, 2008","datePublished":"2008-12-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-02T07:41:11+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudarsan-sahu-and-others-vs-unknown-on-5-december-2008"},"wordCount":1597,"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\/sudarsan-sahu-and-others-vs-unknown-on-5-december-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudarsan-sahu-and-others-vs-unknown-on-5-december-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudarsan-sahu-and-others-vs-unknown-on-5-december-2008","name":"Sudarsan Sahu And Others vs Unknown on 5 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-12-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-02T07:41:11+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudarsan-sahu-and-others-vs-unknown-on-5-december-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudarsan-sahu-and-others-vs-unknown-on-5-december-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sudarsan-sahu-and-others-vs-unknown-on-5-december-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sudarsan Sahu And Others vs Unknown on 5 December, 2008"}]},{"@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\/46235","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=46235"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/46235\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=46235"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=46235"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=46235"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}