Partly allowed

Tuna Jena v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC17 Aug 2020WP(C)/15923/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking financial assistance for property loss due to Cyclone Fani. The court directed the competent authority to consider a fresh representation filed by the petitioner within two weeks and decide within four weeks if filed.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Collector to consider a fresh representation filed within two weeks and decide within four weeks.

Tuna Jena Vs State of Odisha — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Orissa HC (2020)

¶1

W.P.(C) NO.15923 OF 2020

¶2

02 17.08.2020 Due to outbreak of COVID-19, this matter is taken up through Video Conferencing.

¶3

Though this matter was not there in today’s list, on being mentioned considering the urgency of the matter and under a special notice, the matter is taken up for final disposal.

¶4

Heard Miss D. Parida, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A.K. Mishra, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State-opposite parties.

¶5

This writ petition has been filed with a prayer to direct the opposite parties, more particularly, opposite party no.2-Collector, Puri to release the financial benefits for the loss sustained by the petitioner to his property due to Super Cyclone (Fani). In that regard, the petitioner has already submitted a representation to the Collector, Puri-opposite party no.2, copy of which is annexed to the writ petition as at Annexure-4(A), which is still pending.

¶6

In course of hearing, Miss Parida, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner will file a better representation before the Collector- Puri-opposite party no.2 detailing his grievances along with relevant documents as well. She, therefore, prays for a direction for early disposal of the said representation and for release of the financial assistance for the loss sustained by the petitioner due to Super Cyclone (Fani).

¶7

¶8

Mr. Mishra, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State submits that if a representation is filed before the Collector, Puri-opposite party no.2 detailing the grievances, the Collector, Puri-opposite party no.2, who is the competent authority may take a decision on the same in accordance with law.

¶9

Taking into consideration the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, disposes of the writ petition with a direction that in the event the petitioner files a fresh comprehensive representation before the Collector, Puri-opposite party no.2 within a period of two weeks hence along with an authenticated copy of this order downloaded from the website of the Orissa High Court, the Collector, Puriopposite party no.2 shall do well to consider the same on its own merit and take a decision in accordance with law within a period of four weeks therefrom.

¶10

Authenticated copy of this order downloaded from the website of this Court shall be treated at par with certified copy in the manner prescribed in this Court’s Notice No.4587 dated 25.03.2020.

¶11

................................. K.R. Mohapatra, J.

¶12

¶13

Tuna Jena v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tuna Jena v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saikh Akbar Uddin Vs the Secretary Health and Family Welfare Deptt.

Prahallad Dikshit Vs State of Odisha

Dr.Pratap Kumar Rath Vs State of Odisha

Harekrushna Rout Vs State of Orissa

Krushnachandra Champatiray Vs State of Odisha

Pradeep Kumar Jena Vs the State of Odisha