Disposed
Mihira Ray v. Dist.Agriculture Officer-Cum-Krushi Sahayak
Orissa HCWP(C)/2166/2015
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
of 2015 1.8.2017 Heard learned counsel for…
What the court decided
AI extract
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P.(C) No. 2166 of 2015
1.8.2017
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the opp. Parties.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner being unemployed, sough
t to set up a agro based enterprise with assistance of Agricultural Promotion and Investment C
orporation of Odisha Ltd., Odisha (in short APICOL) and for that applied to the opp. Party no.
4 with necessary project proposal. Accordingly, opp. Party no.4 took steps under the State Agr
iculture Policy, 2008. After receipt of the project report the District Agriculture Officer-cu
m-Krushi Sahayak, Nimapara intimated opp. Party no.3 for sponsoring Sheep Unit.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in spite of the application of petitio
ner and letter to opp. Party no.3 the matter is still pending with opp. Party no.3 vide Annexu
re-4. He submits that necessary direction be issued to opp. Party no.3 for early action so as
to go ahead with the project.
Learned counsel for opp. Party no.3 submits that necessary letter of the District Agri
culture Officer has been received by the Bank and it is kept for consideration. He also admits
that the application of the petitioner is accompanied with the proposal.
Learned counsel for the APICOL-opp. Party states that they have nothing to submit exce
pt the fact that soon after the sanction is made by opp. Party no.3, they would go ahead with
the necessary assistance to the petitioner.
Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, without going to the
merit of the case, the writ application is disposed of with a direction to opp. Party no.3 to
consider the proposal of the petitioner and opposite party no.4 and take a decision within a p
eriod of eight weeks from today and communicate the same to the petitioner by Speed Post with
A.D.
Certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.
Dr.D.P.Choudhury, J.
2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to direct the respondents to dispose of the pending application for setting up an agro-based sheep unit.
Petitioner
Opposite Party no.3
Opposite Party no.4
Agricultural Promotion and Investment Corporation of Odisha Ltd.
Dr.D.P.Choudhury
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court