Chintamani v. State

OJC No. 479 of 1996

08.12.2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. Bhuyan, learned Addl. Govt. Advoca
te for the State-opposite party.

 The petitioner has filed this application claiming for re-determination of release of
grant in aid as per the principles laid down in 1978 and also for approval of his post and fur
ther seeks for a direction to extend the benefit of full salary cost w.e.f. 1.6.1982.
 Learned counsel for the petitioner states that since the benefit of approval of the po
st along with release of grant in aid has not been extended to the petitioner, he has approach
 this Court by filing the present writ application.
 Mr. B. Bhuyan, Addl. Govt. Advocate for the State-opposite party states that since th
e petitioner claims for approval of his post and release of grant in aid, this Court has no ju
risdiction to entertain this application. In that view of the matter, the petitioner has to ap
proach the appropriate forum ventilating his grievance in accordance with law.
 Considering the contention raised by learned counsel for the parties and after going t
hrough the records, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this writ applic
ation stands disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum
under Section 24-B of the Orissa Education Act in accordance with law.
 With the aforesaid liberty, the writ application stands disposed of.

(DR. B.R. SARANGI)