The High Court of Odisha dismissed the writ petition regarding departmental proceedings as withdrawn by the petitioner, granting liberty to file an appeal before the appellate authority with an application for condonation of delay.
Writ petition disposed of as withdrawn; liberty granted to file appeal with condonation of delay before appellate authority.
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.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.12005 OF 2012
Saroj Kumar Mishro ….. Petitioner Mr. Digambara Mishra, Advocate Vs. Paradeep Port Trust & Ors. ….. Opposite parties Mr. P.K. Nanda, Adv. O.Ps. No.1 & 2 Mr. S.D. Das, Adv. O.P. No.3
Order No. 9
CORAM: DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI ORDER 16.08.2021 This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. Heard Mr. D. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P.K. Nanda, learned counsel appearing for the Paradeep Port Trust.
The petitioner has filed this writ petition to quash the order dated 02.07.2012 under Annexure-9 and restrain the opposite party-Paradeep Port Trust to proceed with the departmental proceeding till conclusion of the criminal proceeding in T.R. No.17 of 2011. He further seeks to quash the order of suspension dated 21.05.2012 and orders dated 16.06.2012 and 26.06.2012 under Annexure-7 series. He further seeks to quash the orders under
2
Annexures-10 and 12 and the order dated 05.10.2012 under Annexure-13 and also declare that Annexure-11 does not empower the Deputy Chairman to issue order of suspension and/or hold and continue the disciplinary proceeding. He further seeks to quash Annexure-15, by which his application dated 03.12.2012 to revoke the order of suspension has been rejected by the Chairman, Paradeep Port Trust.
Mr. P.K. Nanda, learned counsel contended that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the Paradeep Port Trust.
Mr. D. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that during pendency of the writ petition, the departmental proceeding, initiated against the petitioner, has been concluded imposing major penalty. Therefore, the petitioner may be permitted to move the appropriate authority in accordance with law.
Mr. P.K. Nanda, learned counsel appearing for
the Paradeep Port Trust contended that punishment was imposed in 2017 and in the meantime, 3 years have passed.
Since the matter is pending before this Court, learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file an appeal along with an application for condonation of delay before the appellate authority.
3
In that view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn granting liberty to the petitioner to prefer appeal before the appellate authority along with an application for condonation of delay. In the event, he files appeal along with an application for condonation of delay, the appellate authority shall consider the same and pass appropriate order.
(DR. B.R. SARANGI) JUDGE
Alok
Saroj Kumar Mishro
Paradeep Port Trust
B.R. Sarangi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
