Orissa High Court
Auromohit Shuvaswagat Giri vs Collector on 30 June, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.15135 of 2025
(In the matter of an application under Article 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India)
Auromohit Shuvaswagat Giri .... Petitioner
-versus-
Collector, Keonjhar and others .... Opposite Parties
Appeared in this case:-
For Petitioner : Mr. Sidhartha Das, Advocate
For Opposite Parties : Ms. Jyoshnamayee Sahoo,
Learned Additional Standing Counsel
CORAM:
JUSTICE A.C. BEHERA
JUDGMENT
Date of hearing : 19.06.2025 / date of judgment : 30.06.2025
A.C. Behera, J. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of
India, 1950 has been filed by the petitioner praying for setting aside an
order dated 20.04.2023 (Annexure-1) passed in a Mutation Case No.69 of
2023 by the Tahasildar, Champua(Opposite Party No.2).
2. The factual backgrounds of this writ petition, which prompted the
petitioner for filing of the same is that, Anadi Charan Giri and Rajkishore
Giri were the joint owners of Plot No.551/1758 Ac.0.31 decimals under
Khata No.5 in Mouza-Ramla under Champua Tahasil in the district of
Keonjhar.
Out of that Ac.0.31 decimals of Plot No.551/1758, Rajkishore Giri
sold his half share of that Plot No.551/1758 to Satyabrata Giri and
Subhendu Kumar Giri executing and registering Sale Deed No.682 dated
12.09.2000 and Sale Deed No.273 dated 13.05.2002 respectively.
Thereafter, Anandi Charan Giri bequeathed his rest half share of
Plot No.551/1758, i.e., Ac.0.15 decimals to his minor grand-son
Auromohit Shuvaswagat Giri represented through his father guardian
Subhendu Kumar Giri executing and registering Will bearing
No.31041600354 dated 18.10.2016 in his favour.
When, the testator of the above registered Will dated
18.10.2016(Annexure-6) Anadi Charan Giri died on 08.07.2018, then,
the petitioner Auromohit Shuvaswagat Giri being the beneficiary of the
Will possessed the bequeathed properties covered under the above Will
Ac.0.15 decimals of Plot No.551/1758 through his father guardian as the
owner of the same and filed Mutation Case No.69 of 2023 before the
Tahasildar, Champua(Opposite Party No.2) for mutation of the above
properties covered under the Will dated 18.10.2016(Annexure-6).
Page 2 of 8
As per the order dated 20.04.2023(Annexure-1), the Tahasildar,
Champua(Opposite Party No.2) rejected to that Mutation Case No.69 of
2023 filed by the petitioner assigning the sole reason/ground that, “Will
is not probated.”
On being aggrieved with the above order of rejection to the
Mutation Case No.69 of 2023 passed by the Tahasildar, Champua
(Opposite Party No.2) on dated 20.04.2023 as per Annexure-1, the
petitioner challenged the same by filing this writ petition praying for
quashing the said order dated 20.04.2023(Annexure-1) passed in
Mutation Case No.69 of 2023 by the Tahasildar, Champua(Opposite
Party No.2.
3. I have already heard from the learned counsel for the petitioner
and learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State.
4. It is the settled propositions of law that, when a Will in question is
executed in the Districts, which were coming under the ex-princely State
like Mayurbhanj, Bolangir, Koraput, Dhenkanal, Ganjam, Sundargarh,
Sambalpur, Angul, Keonjhar, Kalahandi, Subarnapur, Rayagada,
Jharsuguda, Malkanagiri and others, no probate of Will is necessary. In
the said Districts, Revenue Authorities and Tahasildars can proceed with
the mutation cases on the basis of un-probated Wills.
Page 3 of 8
5. On this aspect, it has already been clarified by the Hon’ble Courts
in the ratio of the decisions reported in
(I) 1972(2) C.W.R.-1451, Amrutlal Majhi and others vrs.
Japi Sahuani and others. (II) AIR 1973 Orissa-112,
Balaram Tripathy and another vrs. Lokanath Tripathy.
(III) 48(1979) CLT-211 (Para-8), Mst. Radha Hota
vrs. Dutika Satpathy and another, (IV) 2008(I) OLR-
729, Sailabala Satpathy vrs, Parbati Satpathy and
others. (V) 2009(II) CLR-155, Aparna Sahu and
others vrs. Raghunath Biswal and others. (VI)
2012(II) OLR-394, Kunjabihari Sahu vrs. State of
Orissa and others. (VII) 2015(II) CLR-1075 &
2015(II) OLR-1025, Ritesh Kumar Patel @ Ritesh
Patel vrs. Kishore Chandra Patel and others. (VIII)
W.P.(C) No.24927 of 2021, Subrat Purohit vrs. State
of Orissa and others. (IX) W.P.(C) No.33187 of 2021,
Ratnamala Mishra vrs. State of Orissa and others. (X)
W.P.(C) No.5216 of 2023, Fatik Bala and others vrs.
State of Odisha and others. (XI) 2023(I) CLR-621,
Amrita Pandey vrs. State of Orissa and another that,
“If the Wills are executed in a place either outside the areas
specified in the clauses of Section 57 of the Indian Succession
Act, 1925 or in respect of the immovable properties situated
beyond the territories specified in clauses of Section 57 of the
Indian Succession Act, 1925, those areas/territories were under
the ex-princely State called as Gadajat Wills, probate of such
Wills are not required under law. The Revenue Authorities in the
said areas can proceed with the mutation cases on the basis of
un-probated Wills.”
6. Government of Orissa has issued a Letter vide letter No.23734
dated 13.08.2019 to the Collector, Mayurbhanj (which district was also
coming under the ex-princely State) on the basis of the decision of this
Hon’ble Courts in a case between Ritesh Kumar Patel @ Ritesh Patel
Page 4 of 8
vrs. Kishore Chandra Patel and others : reported in 2015(II) OLR-
1025, modifying the previous Letter No.16449 dated 07.05.2018 that,
“probate of a Will is not required in the District of Mayurbhanj
and the Revenue Authorities can proceed with the mutation case,
if the same is filed for mutation on the basis of un-probated Will.
Because, initiation of probate proceeding for probation of a Will
is not necessary in the district of Mayurbhanj. For which, the
restriction for mutation of the properties on the basis of the un-
probated Will in the district of Mayurbhanj as directed earlier in
Para No.6 of Letter No.16449 dated 07.05.2018 of the
Government stands modified.”
7. In view of the ratio of the aforesaid decisions of the Hon’ble
Courts as well as Letter No.23734 dated 13.08.2019 of Government of
Odisha, “no probate is necessary in respect of “Gadajat Wills” and the
revenue courts including Tahasildars in such areas of the Districts in the
State shall entertain mutation cases on the basis of un-probated Wills.
8. As per law, it is beyond the jurisdiction of the revenue authorities
to decide the disputed matters concerning the Wills, if dispute arises
before the revenue authorities either in respect of the genuineness of the
Will in question or in respect of the properties covered under the Will.
9. On this aspect, the propositions of law has already been clarified
by the Hon’ble Courts and Apex Court in the ratio of the following
decisions:-
Page 5 of 8
(i) In a case between Pradeep Kumar Singh and another
vrs. State of Uttar Pradesh Through Secy. Revenue
Lko. and others : reported in 2022(4) Civil Court
Cases-455(Allahabad) that, in a mutation case, where
Will is still subject to scrutiny of appropriate civil
Court, then finding of civil Court will be binding on
mutation court. (Para-15)
(ii) In a case between Noor Ahmad @ Chand vrs. Board
of Revenue and others : reported in 2022(1) Civil
Court Cases-391(Allahabad)–Legality of Will,
cannot be tested in mutation proceedings and could
have been tested only in a regular proceedings.(Para-6)
(iii) In a case between Ashok Kumar Pati and another
vrs. State of Orissa and others : reported in 2021(I)
OLR-655–Contentious issue of title claim based on a
Will cannot be decided by a Revisional Authority
under Section 15(b) of OSS Act, 1958–Amount to
exercise of excess jurisdiction–Issue of title can only
be decided by a Civil Court.
(iv) In a case between Jitendra Singh vrs. State of
Madhya Pradesh and others : reported in 2021(4)
Civil Court Cases(S.C.)-29–Mutation–When an
application for mutation is filed on the basis of Will, if
dispute is with respect to title and more particularly,
when mutation is sought on the basis of Will, such
party has to get his rights crystalized by Civil Court
and only thereafter on the basis of decision of Civil
Court, necessary mutation entry can be made.(Para-5)
10. It is the clarified propositions of law according to the principles of
law enunciated in the ratio of the above decisions of the Hon’ble Courts
and Apex Court as well as Letter No.23734 dated 13.08.2019 of the
Government of Orissa that, “Mutation cases in the areas inside the State
of Odisha, those were coming under the ex-princely State, on the basis of
un-probated Wills are entertainable by the Revenue Authorities and
Tahasildars, but, if after initiation of mutation proceedings on the basis of
Page 6 of 8
un-probated Wills, any dispute either in respect to the genuineness of
such un-probated Wills in question or any dispute concerning the
properties covered under the said Wills is raised, then, the Revenue
Authorities and Tahasildars have no other option, but, to drop the
mutation proceeding directing the parties to crystalize their rights by the
Civil Court and only thereafter on the basis of the decision of the Civil
Court, necessary mutation entry can be made. Because, in a mutation
proceeding, Revenue Authorities and Tahasildars have no jurisdiction to
decide any contentious issue based on a Will.
11. As per the discussions and observations made above, when, it is
held that, there is no requirement under law for probation of the Will
executed in favour of the wit petitioner (applicant in Mutation Case
No.69 of 2023), because, the said Will dated 18.10.2016(Annexure-6)
has been executed in the District of Keonjhar, which was under the ex-
princely State, then at this juncture, order dated 20.04.2023(Annexure-1)
passed by the Tahasildar, Champua(Opposite Party no.2) rejecting the
Mutation Case No.69 of 2023 on the ground of non-probation of that
Will cannot be sustainable under law.
For which, order dated 20.04.2023 (Annexure-1) passed by the
Opposite Party No.2 (Tahasildar, Champua) in Mutation Case No.69 of
2023 is to be quashed(set aside).
Page 7 of 8
Therefore, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is allowed. The
order dated 20.04.2023 (Annexure-1) passed in Mutation Case No.69 of
2023 by the Opposite Party No.2(Tahasildar, Champua) is quashed(set
aside).
12. The Tahasildar, Champua(Opposite Party No.2) is directed to
consider the mutation case vide Mutation Case No.69 of 2023 of the
petitioner afresh and to proceed with the same as per law following the
formulated guidelines of this Court in the judgment between Prasanta
Biswanath @ Prasanta Kumar Biswanath vrs. The State of Odisha,
represented through its Collector, Rayagada and another in W.P.(C)
No.51 of 2025 decided on dated 31.01.2025 within a period of one
month from the date of filing of the certified copy of this judgment by the
petitioner before the Opposite Party No.2.
13. So, with the aforesaid findings, observations, clarifications and
guidelines, this writ petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of finally.
( A.C. Behera )
Judge
Orissa High Court, Cuttack
The 30th of June, 2025/ Jagabandhu, P.A.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: JAGABANDHU BEHERA
Designation: Personal Assistant
Reason: Authentication
Location: OHC, CUTTACK
Date: 30-Jun-2025 17:43:33
Page 8 of 8