'Breach Of Laxman Rekha': Orissa High Court Pulls-Up Cuttack Collector For Seeking To Replace ADM In Court Ordered Traffic Committee
A city that gave Odisha its history can't be left to gasp in dust and diesel, Court observed.
"Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do", the Orissa High Court said referring to the Bible as it pulled up the Collector and District Magistrate, Kataka (formerly Cuttack) for filing an interim application seeking to replace the Additional District Magistrate (ADM) with a Tahasildar in the Traffic Committee, previously ordered by the Court.A special Division Bench of...
"Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do", the Orissa High Court said referring to the Bible as it pulled up the Collector and District Magistrate, Kataka (formerly Cuttack) for filing an interim application seeking to replace the Additional District Magistrate (ADM) with a Tahasildar in the Traffic Committee, previously ordered by the Court.
A special Division Bench of Justice Krushna Ram Mohapatra and Justice V. Narasingh, while hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) concerning the civic issues of the millennial city, was confounded by the plea made by the Collector and thus, scornfully observed–
“The Deponent, despite his persuasive eloquence, could not justify how he can suggest to this Court what committee should or should not be there, and that too to substitute a committee constituted by this Court with a committee headed by himself. The more he tried to justify, the more unjustifiable it became. To borrow from the Bard, "The lady doth protest too much, methinks" - Hamlet (Act III, Scene II). The justification itself became the loudest admission of the error...What is more disconcerting is that the Deponent, in the garb of seeking review/modification, is trying to act as an appellate authority over an order passed by this Court.”
While taking up the case on 13.08.2026, the Court, upon acknowledging the choking and enervating traffic conditions of the city, had ordered constitution of a committee helmed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Kataka, other members being an officer not below the rank of ADM, the Deputy Commissioner, Kataka Municipal Corporation (KMC) and an officer of the equivalent rank of the Kataka Development Authority (KDA).
The committee was tasked to suggest remedial measures, ward-wise, to ease traffic congestion, to ensure that there is no obstruction on drains and roads etc., and to make sure there is no recurrence of any obstruction, after removal thereof.
Subsequently, when the Bench took up the case for hearing on 03.09.2026, Dattatraya Bhausaheb Shinde, IAS, Collector and District Magistrate, Kataka personally appeared and sought modification of the aforesaid order dated 13.08.2026 through an IA. He urged the Bench to replace the ADM with a Tahasildar in the said committee as the objective for which the it is constituted “may be better served” by substituting Tahasildar in place of ADM. In the alternative, he suggested that the task may be allowed to be taken up under District Road Safety Committee.
However, the Court was loath to accept such suggestion. It rather criticised the Collector for breaching the “Laxman Rekha” by assuming the ignorance of the Court regarding the hierarchal structure of the city's administrative wing. In the words of the Court–
“The Deponent seeking substitution of the ADM by Tahasildar evidently labours under the misconception that this Court is not aware of hierarchical dispensation and functional efficacy of various authorities. This Court, while constituting the Committee, was cognizant of the existence of the Traffic Management Committee of 2011 as well as the District Road Safety Committee. Yet, chose to constitute a distinct Committee to address the myriad issues of traffic congestion in the City of Cuttack.”
The Bench further questioned the efficacy of the District Road Safety Committee and wondered why the traffic woes are frequent if the said committee is adhering to the purpose with which it was constituted.
“Cuttack, the city of silver filigree, was never meant to be a city of traffic snarls. It was built on the banks of Mahanadi to breathe, not to choke…This Court notes with consternation and dismay the suggestion given by the Deponent to replace the committee wholesale by the "District Road Safety Committee". Such a suggestion begs the question, if the District Road Safety Committee is even remotely functional, why are the roads of this ancient City and the highways leading to it in such an abysmal condition, resulting in mishaps and accidents every single day?”
Therefore, expressing severe dismay over the suggestion advanced by the Collector, the Court ordered him to notify the ADM as a member of the committee constituted in terms of the order dated 13.08.2026, and to report compliance by 08.09.2026. Though the Court restrained from passing any punitive order against the administrator, it warned against similar future recurrence.
It also asked the Registry to communicate a copy of the order to the Chief Secretary of the State for her information.
Case Title: Registrar (Judicial), Orissa High Court, Cuttack v. State of Odisha & Ors.
Case No: W.P.(C) PIL No. 2140 of 2020
Date of Order: September 03, 2026
Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. L. Samantaray, Sr. Advocate & President, OHCBA Mr. P.K. Mohapatra, Advocate & Vice-President, OHCBA; Mr. Hrudananda Mohapatra, Advocate & Secretary, OHCBA; Mr. P.K. Bhuyan, Mr. B.B. Choudhury & Mr. S.B. Mohanty, Advocates
Counsel for the State: Mr. Debasis Nayak, Addl. Govt. Advocate
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ori) 105