The High Court of Orissa set aside an order passing on merits without notice to appellants in a dispute regarding regularization of services. The matter was remanded for fresh disposal after pleadings.
Impugned order set aside; matter remanded for fresh disposal after pleadings; status quo of employment maintained.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.A. No.240 of 2021
State of Odisha & Another
…. Appellants Mr. A.K. Parija, Advocate General with Mr. M. K. Khuntia, A.G.A.
Versus
Nandalal Barik
…. Respondent No.1 Mr. S. K. Rout, Advocate
CORAM:
THE CHIEF JUSTICE
JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
Order No.
ORDER 17.06.2021
1 . This matter is taken up by video conferencing mode.
2 . In this writ appeal, the Appellants (State of Odisha) challenge the order dated 28th August, 2020 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.21289 of 2020 directing the Appellants to regularize the services of the Respondent No.1 in light of the judgment in State of Karnataka and Others v. Umadevi (3) (2006) 4 SCC 1 and State of Karnataka & others v. M. L. Kesari (2010) 9 SCC 247 .
Page 1 of 3
// 2 //
the Appellants herein. Accordingly, there was no occasion for the Appellants to even file a counter affidavit after verifying the factual averments in the petition. Mr. Parija points out that the writ petition was disposed of by simply following an earlier order of the learned Single judge of similar nature which too was passed on the very first date. He further points out that in some of the petitions even the correct Department of the Government was not impleaded as party.
(i) W.P. (C) No. 21289 of 2020 is restored to the file of the learned Single Judge and shall be listed before the learned Single Judge for directions on 19th July, 2021.
(ii) By the aforementioned date, the State of Odisha shall file their para-wise reply to the aforementioned writ petition.
Page 2 of 3
// 3 //
(iii) The Respondent No.1 herein i.e. the Writ Petitioner shall be given an opportunity by the learned Single Judge to file a rejoinder to the above affidavit in a time-bound manner. In any event the pleadings in the writ petition shall be completed not later than 31st August, 2021.
(iv) The learned Single Judge is requested to endeavour to dispose of the writ petition on merits not later than 8th November, 2021.
(v) Till the disposal of the writ petition, the status quo as to the services of the Respondent No.1 shall be maintained.
(Dr. S. Muralidhar)
Chief Justice
(Savitri Ratho)
Judge
Prasant
Page 3 of 3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned order disposing of the writ petition without issuing notice to the appellants or opportunity to file counter affidavit should be set aside.
Whether the matter should be remanded to the learned Single Judge for fresh disposal after completion of pleadings.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Karnataka and Others v. Umadevi (3)Referred¶15
State of Karnataka and Others v. Umadevi (3) (2006) 4 SCC 1 · Who else cites this
State of Karnataka & others v. M. L. KesariReferred¶15
State of Karnataka & others v. M. L. Kesari (2010) 9 SCC 247 · Who else cites this
State of Odisha
Nandalal Barik
Savitri Ratho
Prasant
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Savitri Ratho and Prasant
Parties & counsel
