Remanded

Subash Chandra Samantaray v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC7 Oct 2021WP(C)/3028/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Orissa allowed this writ petition, quashing an impugned order that relied on an unavailable resolution and ignored settled law. The matter is remitted to the Department for reconsideration in light of a prior judgment, directing them to communicate and act on the order within two months.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order permitted to be withdrawn; matter remitted to Opposite Parties to reconsider issues in light of previous judgment and dispose within two months.

Subash Chandra Samantaray Vs State of Odisha — Education and Admissions | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.3028 of 2021

¶2

Subash Chandra Samantaray

¶3

…. Petitioner(s)

¶4

Mr. S. Mishra, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha & Ors.

¶7

…. Opposite Parties Mr. D. Mohapatra, Standing Counsel

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

JUSTICE BISWANATH RATH

ORDER 07.10.2021

Order No.

1. For the decision of this Court already taken on 28.09.2021 in W.P.(C) No.23312 of 2020 along with two other writ petitions observing that there is mechanical disposal of the matter through the impugned order, more particularly keeping in view the observation made therein that the decision of the District Education Officer rested on an unavailable Resolution and in non-application of the settled position of law through the decision covering the case of the Petitioner(s) already at hand, further keeping in view the request of the learned Senior Standing Counsel that the Department wants to withdraw the impugned order therein for their own realization that there is not only wrong application of unavailable resolution but there is also no consideration of settled position of law, the impugned order involved herein is permitted to be withdrawn. The observation made and direction issued today in W.P.(C) No.23312

¶14

Page 1 of 2

¶15

// 2 //

¶16

of 2020 along with two other writ petitions, since squarely covers the case at hand, are required to be followed.

¶17

2. The writ petition succeeds, but as there is requirement for reconsideration of the issues, the matter is remitted to the Opposite Party Nos.1 & 2 to consider the request of the Petitioner(s) strictly in terms of the direction contained in W.P.(C) No.23312 of 2020 along with two other writ petitions disposed of by this Court on 28.09.2021 and also the decisions referred to therein and by considering all the issues in a common decision.

¶18

3. In order to avoid any further delay, learned Counsel for the Department is directed to communicate the order to the Opposite Party Nos.1 & 2 along with copy of the order passed in W.P.(C) No.23312 of 2020 for their doing the needful within two months from such communication.

¶19

4. The writ petition thus stands disposed of.

¶20

(Biswanath Rath) Judge

¶21

A.K. Jena

¶22

Page 2 of 2

Subash Chandra Samantaray v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subash Chandra Samantaray 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Swagatika Muduli Vs Bijaya Ku.Muduli

Monalisha Panda Vs Asish Ku.Mahapatra

Sumati Bag Vs Sambhu Prasad Bishi

Ananda Mohan Pattnaik Vs Anu Garg, I.a.S, Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Deptt.

Purna Chandra Behera Vs Akrur Barik, District Inspector of Schools

Udayanath Rout Vs Sri Pradeep Kumar Mohapatra, I.A.S.