Partly allowed

Kishor Kumar Naik v. the State of Odisha

Orissa HC13 Nov 2020WP(C)/15969/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge Bench clarified a previous order by replacing a paragraph based on petitioner's contributory error. The Court directed the disciplinary authority to conclude pending proceedings within two months and resolve any pending arrear dues if applicable.

What did the court decide?

Direction to complete disciplinary proceedings and decide arrear dues within two months.

Kishor Kumar Naik Vs the State of Odisha — Service and Employment | Orissa HC (2020)

¶1

C.M.P. No.1360 of 2015 W.P.(C). No.15969 of 2020

¶2

I.A.No.14401 of 2020 & I.A.No.14492 of 2020

¶3

5 08.02.2021 This matter is taken up through Video conferencing. Heard Sri Goutam Acharya, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri Saswat Acharya learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.5.

¶4

Considering the submission of Sri G. Acharya, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Sri S. Acharya, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.5, this Court finds the mentioning in the first paragraph after quotation portion at page-2 of the order dated 13.11.2020, appears to be based on wrong pleading of the petitioner in the previous writ petition involving W.P.(C).No. 4442 of 2019. Sri G.Acharya, learned senior counsel submits that in fact even though the petitioner has already been reinstated in his service in the meantime, but however, the disciplinary proceeding did not see any logical end as of now.

¶5

Keeping this in view, this Court finds the paragraph indicated hereinabove contain a bonafidely wrong submission of the petitioner, this Court accepting the request of Sri Acharya, replaces the paragraph with the following:

¶6

“It is at this stage, Sri G.Acharya, learned senor counsel makes a statement that for the averments available in this writ petition and for the development taken place in the meantime basing on the resolution, though the petitioner has already been reinstated into his service, but however the disciplinary proceeding has not seen any logical end and it is requested for giving a suitable direction to the disciplinary authority to see the logical end of the disciplinary proceeding pending at their end.

¶7

Keeping this in view, this Court directs in the event the disciplinary proceeding involving the petitioner is still pending, the same should see a logical end but, however, involving the petitioner by completing the entire exercise within a period of two

¶8

-2-

¶9

months from the date of communication of a copy of this order by the petitioner.

¶10

It is at this stage of the matter, a further request is also made by Sri G.Acharya, learned senior counsel that the petitioner is yet to get the arrear dues for not being disbursed by the authority. Considering the same, this Court simply directs in the event any arrear dues involving the petitioner is pending, a lawful decision on this issue be taken within a period of two months also.

¶11

Both the I.As, stand disposed of.

¶12

As restrictions are continuing for Covid-19, petitioner may utilize the soft copy of this order available in the High Court’s Website or print out thereof at par with certified copies in the manner prescribed vide Court’s Notification No.4587 dated 25.3.2020.

¶13

BISWANATH RATH,J

¶14

sks

Kishor Kumar Naik v. the State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kishor Kumar Naik v. the 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

K.C.C.Bank Employees Vs Regr.of Co-Op.

Dr.Surendranath Vs State

Akshya Kumar Behera Vs Chitra Arumugam

Dr. Bhagabata Behera Vs State of Odisha

Kishor Kumar Naik Vs State of Odisha

Susil Kumar Baral Vs Chief Hrd Tata Power