JUDGMENT 1. Mr. Dash, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, impugned is judgment dated 24th January, 2022, by which the Commissioner refused to grant certificate in Form AA provided by rule 4-A(3) in Odisha Hindu Religious Endowment Rules, 1959. He submits, it is apparent from the judgment that there is finding on fact regarding the deity being private. However, the Commissioner said there was no link between his client and recorded marfatdar. 2. Mr. Dash draws attention to annexure-5 being certificate dated 23rd September, 2022 issued by Sarpanch of concerned village saying that his client is only son of brother of recorded marfatdar. He emphasis, there was no objection received regarding it is a private deity. Permission by Form-AA ought to have been issued. 3. Ms. Naidu, learned advocate appears on behalf of the Commissioner and points out, the application was made in year 2013 and there is apparent effort at creating a link after impugned judgment was delivered. 4. We have perused inspection report dated 11th December, 2014. As far back as at that time there was no objection and local people had told the inspector, no outsider is allowed to have darshan of the deity. Sebapuja of the deity is exclusively done by Sri Gangadhar Mohanty and his family members. We have prima facie appreciation that petitioner cannot be excluded from the family of Sri Gangadhar Mohanty. We also appreciate that on rejection by impugned judgment, based on reason of absence of link, petitioner approached and obtained certificate dated 23rd September, 2022 from the Sarpanch and thereupon moved this Court. 5. The Commissioner is directed to consider the additional fact of petitioner having obtained the certificate from the Sarpanch and deal with the application expeditiously, within six weeks of communication. We may it clear that we have not said anything regarding the inquiry report or other findings of the Commissioner in impugned judgment regarding nature of the deity. Hence, the judgment is set aside to the extent regarding finding of absence of link of petitioner with recorded marfatdars. 6. The writ petition is disposed of.