AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Mr. Dalai, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, impugned is order dated 19th May, 2015 passed by the Commissioner rejecting his client’s application for appointment of Divisional Inspector of Endowments (DIE) as Special Trustee on holding that his client had no locus standi. He submits, his client is in possession of land, settlement of which he is seeking. The Mahant is resisting his client’s claim. His client, therefore, applied for the DIE to be appointed as Special Trustee, to look into his client’s claim for settlement of the land.
We by our orders dated 14th and 29th March, 2023 gave time to petitioner for producing the application made under section 7 in Orissa Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1951. Mr. Dalai submits, his client could not trace the application but has applied for certified copy.
Mr. Nath, learned advocate appears on behalf of the Commissioner and submits, the application is also not in the file. He submits further, subsequent events have been that there was succession by other persons as board of trustees. In the circumstances, no order be made in the writ application.
Petitioner clearly cannot pursue his claim for settlement of the land by present petition. This is because not only is the application missing, for us to adjudicate correctness of impugned order made on it, secondly, since there has been change in the administration, petitioner would be well advised to present his claim afresh.
With above observation, the writ petition is disposed of.
……………………………..