IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C). No.11360 of 2026 Samir Kumar Sahoo …. Petitioner Mr. Anup Kumar Pattnaik, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and Others …. Opposite Parties Mr. Siba Narayan Biswal, Additional Standing Counsel CORAM: JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA ORDER Order No. 25.06.2026 01. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. This writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:-“It is therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble court be graciously pleased to issue Rule NISI, and after hearing both the parties, adjudge and direct that 1. The letter dated 07.03.2026 bearing Memo No. 2036 issued by the Opposite Party No. 3, i.e., Annexure-I4 be set Aside and quashed; 2. The letter dated 07.03.2026 bearing Order No.2037 issued to the Opposite Party No. 5, i.e.,Annexure-15 be set aside and quashed; and 3. The petitioner be granted a de novo reasonable opportunity of hearing in furtherance of the notice dated 27.11.2025, i.e., Annexure-10 that was issued under Section 70A of the Orissa Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1951 4. In consequence of the De Novo hearing, the Opposite Party No. 3 be directed to pass a speaking and well-reasoned order in accordance with law after hearing the petitioner and his grievances.

5. Direct the opposite party no.3 to conduct an impartial and independent audit of the Institution i.e, Nilakanthaeswar Spiritual and Socio Cultural Society within a reasonable period of time preferably three months. Page 1 of 2 And may pass any other order/orders, direction/directions, writ/writs as your lordships deem just and proper; And for this act of kindness, the petitioner as in duty bound, shall ever pray.” 3. Mr. Pattnaik, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that there are some inherent defects in the writ petition. Hence, he prays for withdrawal of the writ petition seeking liberty to file a fresh one with better particulars. 4. A memo in support of his submission is also filed in Court, which is taken on record. 5. Considering the submission made by Mr. Pattnaik, learned counsel for the Petitioner, the writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn with a liberty to file a fresh one with better particulars within a period of one month hence. (K.R. Mohapatra) Judge (S.K. Mishra) Judge Himansu Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: HIMANSU SEKHAR DASH Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 25-Jun-2026 18:50:35 Page 2 of 2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C). No.11360 of 2026 Samir Kumar Sahoo …. Petitioner Mr. Anup Kumar Pattnaik, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and Others …. Opposite Parties Mr. Siba Narayan Biswal, Additional Standing Counsel CORAM: JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA ORDER Order No. 25.06.2026 01. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. This writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:-“It is therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble court be graciously pleased to issue Rule NISI, and after hearing both the parties, adjudge and direct that 1. The letter dated 07.03.2026 bearing Memo No. 2036 issued by the Opposite Party No. 3, i.e., Annexure-I4 be set Aside and quashed; 2. The letter dated 07.03.2026 bearing Order No.2037 issued to the Opposite Party No. 5, i.e.,Annexure-15 be set aside and quashed; and 3. The petitioner be granted a de novo reasonable opportunity of hearing in furtherance of the notice dated 27.11.2025, i.e., Annexure-10 that was issued under Section 70A of the Orissa Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1951 4. In consequence of the De Novo hearing, the Opposite Party No. 3 be directed to pass a speaking and well-reasoned order in accordance with law after hearing the petitioner and his grievances.

5. Direct the opposite party no.3 to conduct an impartial and independent audit of the Institution i.e, Nilakanthaeswar Spiritual and Socio Cultural Society within a reasonable period of time preferably three months. Page 1 of 2 And may pass any other order/orders, direction/directions, writ/writs as your lordships deem just and proper; And for this act of kindness, the petitioner as in duty bound, shall ever pray.” 3. Mr. Pattnaik, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that there are some inherent defects in the writ petition. Hence, he prays for withdrawal of the writ petition seeking liberty to file a fresh one with better particulars. 4. A memo in support of his submission is also filed in Court, which is taken on record. 5. Considering the submission made by Mr. Pattnaik, learned counsel for the Petitioner, the writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn with a liberty to file a fresh one with better particulars within a period of one month hence. (K.R. Mohapatra) Judge (S.K. Mishra) Judge Himansu Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: HIMANSU SEKHAR DASH Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 25-Jun-2026 18:50:35 Page 2 of 2