Disposed

Samir Kumar Jena v. State of Orissa

Orissa HC5 Jan 2016WP(C)/23635/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition was disposed of without expressing an opinion on merits. Directions were issued to the respondent authority to process the petitioner's claim after receiving a representation citing relevant precedents, with a stipulated timeline for examination and decision.

What did the court decide?

Direction to examine petitioner's representation and pass necessary orders within two months if the case is covered by the cited precedents.

The petitioner who is working as a Lecturer in English (1st Post) in Anla Junior Mahav idyalaya, Anla in the district of Mayurbhanj has filed this writ petition seeking for a direct ion to the opposite parties to approve his appointment and release grant-in-aid in his favour w.e.f. 01.06.1994 and grant all consequential service benefit.

Mr. D.K.Mohapatra learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the grievance of the petitioner is squarely covered by the ratio of the decision of this Court in the case of Praf ulla Kumar Sahoo Vrs. State of Orissa and others reported in 2003(I) OLR 91 which has been con firmed by the Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.4389 of 2006 and Chitaranjan Mohapatra and others v. State of Orissa and others in W.P.(C) No.2617 of 2005 decided on 12.1.2011.

Mr. A.K.Mishra learned Additional Government Advocate submits that the relief sought f or by the petitioner in view of the judgment passed in Prafulla Kumar Sahoo(supra) and Chitara njan Mohapatra and others (supra) is not applicable to the present case.

In view of the above without expressing any opinion with regard to merits of t he case this Court disposes of this writ petition with an observation that in case the petitio ner files a representation before the opposite party no.1 within a period of two weeks from to day highlighting his grievance along with authenticated xerox copies of the decision of this C ourt in the case of Prafulla Kumar Sahoo (supra) and Chitaranjan Mohapatra and others (supra) in such event the said opposite party shall examine the case of the petitioner in the light of the ratio decided in the aforesaid cases and if it is found that the case of the petitioner i s squarely covered by the aforesaid decisions shall pass necessary orders in accordance with l aw as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two months from the date of fili ng of such representation.

Samir Kumar Jena v. State of Orissa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Samir Kumar Jena v. State of Orissa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Susanta Ku Mirdha Vs State of Orissa

Sagar Rana Vs State of Orissa

Santosh Kumar Patro Vs M.D.,M/S.Venesa Care Pvt.Ltd.

Puspalata Panigrahi Vs Board of Secondary Education

S.M.I.T. Vs Registrar,E.P.F.

Exe.Engnr.,Athagarh Vs Grievance Redressal