Nilima Mahapatra v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
The single judge dismissed the writ petition as the Respondent contended that the Scheme of Swechhasevi Sikhya Sahayak is abolished, rendering the prayer to continue in service untenable.
What did the court decide?
None. Petitioner's application challenging disengagement order granted a continuance as Swechhasevi Sikhya Sahayak was rejected.
What the court decided
W.P.(C) No. 17150 of 2006
- 14.12.2018 None appears for the petitioner and Mr. B. Satpathy, learned standing Counsel for the School and Mass Education Department.
The petitioner has filed this application challenging disengagement order and further seeks for a direction to allow him to continue as Swechhasevi Sikhya Sahayak.
Mr. B.S. Satpathy, learned Standing Counsel for School and Mass Education Department contended that the Scheme of Swechhasevi Sikhya Sahayak is abolished.
In that view of the matter, the relief sought by the petitioner cannot be granted. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed.
……………………………. Dr. B.R. Sarangi, J
Ajaya
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the relief to continue as Swechhasevi Sikhya Sahayak should be granted given the abolition of the Scheme.
Whether the petitioner's challenge to the disengagement order succeeds.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Petitioner
- respondent
School and Mass Education Department
Coram
Dr. B.R. Sarangi
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court