Writ petition challenging an order regarding promotion was disposed of as infructuous because the petitioner had retired from service before the hearing. Liberty granted to revive if necessary.
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.9012 of 2005
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P.K. Parhi, learned counsel for the opposite parties.
By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 18.02.2005 at Annexure-7 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack in O.A. No.409 of 2003. Further, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a direction to the opposite parties to consider the case of the petitioner for her promotion to the post of Vice-Principal w.e.f. the date when her juniors have been promoted and to grant her all consequential service benefits.
However, it is stated by the learned counsel for the parties that by efflux of time, this writ petition has become infructuous as in the meantime the petitioner has retired from the service.
In view of the above submission, the writ petition stands disposed of being infructuous.
It is made clear that the petitioner will be at liberty to file an application within thirty days from today for revival of this petition in case of any difficulty.
Misc. Cases/I.As. connected to the writ petition, if any, are disposed of accordingly.
.……..........………… ( K.S. Jhaveri ) Chief Justice
……………….…….. ( K.R. Mohapatra ) Judge
SKG
Petitioner
Opposite Parties
K.S. Jhaveri
K.R. Mohapatra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
