Disposed

Rabinarayan Baral v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC8 Dec 2020WP(C)/16577/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court permitted the petitioners to file a fresh comprehensive representation before the concerned authority regarding non-regularization of services. The Court directed the authority to decide within three months without expressing an opinion on whether the certificates were forged.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners permitted to file a fresh representation; authority directed to decide within three months and pass a reasoning and speaking order;

Rabinarayan Baral Vs State of Odisha — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Orissa HC (2020)

¶1

W.P.(C) No. 16577 of 2019

¶2

08.12.2020 The matter is taken up through video conferencing. Heard Mr. T. Panigrahi, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. S.P. Panda, learned Addl. Government Advocate.

¶3

The petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking to quash the order dated 27.04.2018 in Annexure-10 issued by office of the Engineering in Chief, Water Resources Department, Odisha Bhubaneswar as well as letter dated 31.08.2019 vide Annexure-10 issued by the Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division, Puri, by which the services of the petitioners have not been regularized because of furnishing of forged certificates.

¶4

Mr. T. Panigrahi, learned counsel for the petitioners contended that pursuant to the order dated 11.08.2017 passed in W.P.(C) No.21892 of 2016, though the petitioners have been engaged under the opposite parties, but their services have not been regularized. Therefore, the petitioners may be permitted to file fresh representation before the appropriate authority highlighting their grievances as have been raised in this writ petition, so that the authority can apply its mind and pass appropriate order in accordance with law, to which learned Addl. Government Advocate has raised no objection.

¶5

Considering the limited nature of grievance made by the petitioners, this Court, without delving into the matter whether the petitioners have furnished forged certificates or not, disposes of the writ petition permitting the petitioners to file a fresh comprehensive representation before the authority concerned

¶6

¶7

within two weeks hence. If such application is filed, the same shall be considered and decided by the said authority by passing a reasoned and speaking order, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of such representation along with the authenticated/certified copy of this order.

¶8

Needless to say, this Court has not expressed any opinion as to furnishing of forged certificates by the petitioners, if any.

¶9

Ashok

¶10

…………….…………… (DR. B.R. SARANGI) JUDGE

Rabinarayan Baral v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rabinarayan Baral 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rohit Kumar Mahanta Vs State of Odisha

Sarat Chandra Ray Vs State of Odisha

Bimbadhar Satpathy Vs State of Odisha

Pratap Kumar Singha Vs Ashwini Mishra

Narendra Vs Chief Security Comnr

Nalini Devi Vs State of Odisha