Puspalata Purohit v. Nitish Kumar Panda @ Nrutya Gopal Das Babaji

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

WP(C) No.28707 of 2022 (Through Hybrid mode) Puspalata Purohit ....

Petitioner Mr. M. Mishra, Senior Advocate -versusNitish Kumar Panda @ Nrutya Gopal Das Babaji and another ....

Opposite Parties

CORAM:

JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA Order No.

ORDER

01.11.2022 01.

1.

Mr. Mishra, learned senior advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, his client is aggrieved by order dated 26th April, 2022 made by Commissioner of Hindu Religious Endowments. He clarifies, his client is aggrieved by part of paragraph 2 in impugned order that deals with rejection of his client's application for review of order dated 1st October, 2021.

2.

Perused order dated 1st October, 2021. It appears, petitioner had sought to be added as party to the case under section 30 of Orissa

// 2 // Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1951. The Commissioner, by order dated 23rd March, 2021 found that she was neither a proper nor necessary party to the proceeding. Petitioner applied for review of said order and by order dated 1st October, 2021 the review application was dismissed. Petitioner again applied for review before the Commissioner and by the passage in impugned order, the fresh application was again dismissed.

3.

We have perused aforesaid orders. We find that petitioner was given opportunity of ventilating her contention before the Commissioner. The Commissioner found on facts regarding petitioner's claim to be related to Mahant clan. The Commissioner not being satisfied held as aforesaid. By the fresh application, petitioner had made second attempt at review by the Commissioner. 4.

We do not find any illegality or material irregularity in impugned order or the orders preceding.

5.

The writ petition is dismissed.

( Arindam Sinha ) Judge ( S. K. Mishra ) Judge Prasant