The court directed the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation regarding his present posting and pass an appropriate order within three months.
The opposite party no.2 directed to consider and dispose of the representation filed by the petitioner vide Annexure-4 within three months.
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.
W.P.(C) No. 566 of 2021
The matter is taken up through video conferencing. Heard Mr. P.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner.
The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking direction to the opposite parties not to disturb the petitioner from his present place of posting, by quashing the impugned order under Annexure-3.
In course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner states that highlighting the grievance, the petitioner has made representation vide Annexure-4 and direction be given to the opposite party no.2 to consider and dispose of the same.
In view of the aforesaid limited grievance of the petitioner, this Court disposes of the writ petition directing the opposite party no.2 to take a decision on the representation filed by the petitioner vide Annexure-4 and pass appropriate order in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of production of certified/ authenticated copy of this order by the petitioner.
As COVID-19 pandemic situation is continuing, learned counsel for the parties may utilize the soft copy of this order available in the High Court’s official website or print out thereof at par with certified copies in the manner prescribed vide Court’s Notice No.4587 dated 25.03.2020.
…………….……………
(DR. B.R. SARANGI) JUDGE
GDS
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to direct the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation regarding non-transfer?
Whether to set a timeline for the respondent to pass an order on the grievance?
Petitioner
Opposite Party No.2
Dr. B.R. Sarangi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
