Allowed

Soumya Mohanty v. Union of India

Orissa HC15 Sept 2020WP(C)/23505/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a PIL arising from a termination notice issued to a Gramina Dak Sevak under Rule 8(1) of GDS Rules 2020 without enquiry, the Court directed the Chief Postmaster General to consider the petitioner's representation and implement the Tribunal's interim order within three months.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Chief Postmaster General to consider the petitioner's representation and implement the Tribunal's order within three months from the date of producing the certified copy.

Soumya Mohanty Vs Union of India — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Orissa HC (2020)

¶1

W.P(C) No.23505 of 2020

¶2

Soumya Mohanty …. Petitioner Versus

¶3

Union of India & Others……………… Opp.Parties 02 15.09.2020 In view of extraordinary situation arose out of COVID-19, the matter is taken up through Video Conferencing.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

¶5

The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner while working as Gramina Dak Sevak Branch Post Master, Bantalsingh B.O under Pipili SO with effect from 29.08.2019, a notice (Annexure-3) was issued to the petitioner by the opposite party no.4 under Rule 8(1) of Department of Posts, GDS (Conduct & Engagement) Rules, 2020 for termination from his service without any enquiry or giving him any opportunity of hearing.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has already approached the learned Tribunal in O.A No.344 of 2020 and the learned Tribunal has passed an interim order in the said O.A. and disposed of the Original Application with a direction to consider the representation of the petitioner by the authority. Till consideration of his representation, the impugned notice of termination shall not be given effect to.

¶7

As such, in view of the order passed by the learned Tribunal in the aforesaid O.A., the petitioner has already filed a representation with an affidavit. However, in the meantime, since the Tribunal remain closed due to

¶8

¶9

COVID-19, the petitioner was unable to obtain the copy of the order and in order to move before the authority, for which, this writ petition has been filed.

¶10

Learned Assistant Solicitor General submits that in case a representation is filed with an affidavit regarding the fact that the Tribunal passed an order in the aforesaid O.A., the Chief Postmaster General-opposite party No.3 shall consider the same in accordance with the direction issued by the Tribunal.

¶11

With the aforesaid observation, we dispose of the writ petition directing the opposite party No.3 to consider the representation of the petitioner and take steps for implementation of the order of the Tribunal in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of production of the certified copy of this order.

¶12

Learned Assistant Solicitor General is directed to inform the opposite party No.3 regarding the order passed by this Court.

¶13

As Lock-down period is continuing for COVID19, learned counsel for the 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 Notice No.4587 dated 25.3.2020.

¶14

……………………….. S. Panda, J.

¶15

……………………….. S. K. Panigrahi, J.

¶16

LNB/AKP

Soumya Mohanty v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Soumya Mohanty v. Union of India

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

Dayanidhi Behera Vs State of Odisha

Santoshananda Brahmachari Chela Guru Bisweswar Chand Vs State of Odisha

Alok Pattanaik Vs the State of Odisha

Alok Kumar Singh Vs State of Odisha

Apurba Prakash Parida Vs State of Odisha

Mandar Mallik Vs State of Odisha