Allowed

Judhistira Pradhan v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC1 Oct 2021WP(C)/3659/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court permits withdrawal of impugned order due to wrong application of unavailability resolution and non-application of settled law. Petition succeeds with matter remitted to Department for reconsideration based on prior decision.

What did the court decide?

Petition succeeds; impugned order permitted to be withdrawn; matter remitted to Commissioner-cum-Secretary and Director for reconsideration.

Judhistira Pradhan Vs State of Odisha — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Orissa HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No 3659 of 2021

¶3

Judhistira Pradhan

¶4

Petitioner Mr.D.N.Rath, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha &Ors

¶7

…. Opposite Parties Mr. S. Parida, Senior Standing Counsel assisted by Mr. D. Mohapatra, Standing Counsel

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

JUSTICE BISWANATH RATH ORDER 01.10.2021

¶10

Order No.

¶11

¶12

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but there is also no consideration of settled position of law, the impugned order involved herein is permitted to be withdrawn.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

¶13

Page 1 of 2

¶14

// 2 //

¶15

observation made and direction issued in W.P.(C) No.23312 of 2020 along with two other writ petitions, since squarely covers the case at hand, are required to be followed.

¶16

The writ petition succeeds, but as there is requirement for re-consideration of the issues, the matter is remitted to the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, School & Mass Education Department together with the Director of Secondary Education 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.

¶17

In order to avoid any further delay, learned Standing Counsel for the School & Mass Education Department is directed to communicate this order to the Commissioner-cumSecretary, School & Mass Education Department and the Director of Secondary Education along with copy of the order dated 28.09.2021 passed in W.P.(C) No.23312 of 2020 for their doing the needful within two months from such communication.

¶18

The writ petition thus stands disposed of.

¶19

(Biswanath Rath)

¶20

Judge

¶21

Page 2 of 2

Judhistira Pradhan v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Judhistira Pradhan 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

Narendra Mohan Behera Vs Ashok Kumar Mishra, Secretary, Education and Youth Service Deptt.

M.A. Nabi Vs Abhaya Nanda Rath, Secretary, Education and Youth Services Deptt.

Sanat Kumar Ghosh Vs State of Odisha

Binayak Nayak Vs State of Odisha

Bishnu Bhue Vs State of Odisha

Narmada Barik Vs State of Odisha