Partly allowed

Babita Behera v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC20 May 2022WP(C)/11020/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition challenging the selection of an Anganwadi Worker, the High Court held that an efficacious alternative remedy existed via appeal before the Sub-Collector and permitted the petitioner to withdraw the petition to pursue that remedy.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to withdraw the writ petition; appellate authority directed to deal with the appeal expeditiously.

Babita Behera Vs State of Odisha — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No. 11020 of 2022

¶3

Babita Behera …. Petitioner

¶4

Mr. T. K. Biswal, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Orissa & others …. Opp. Parties

¶7

Mr. T.K. Praharaj, Standing Counsel

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

JUSTICE M.S. SAHOO

ORDER

Order No.

20.05.2022

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶15

In view of the matter being disposed of at the stage of admission, the defects pointed out by the Registry are ignored.

¶16

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is aggrieved by selection of opposite party no.5 as Anganwadi Worker relating to Gagadbahal (A) Anganwadi Centre which is a Rural and Tribal centre as per the relevant provision.

¶17

¶18

Learned Standing Counsel submits that in view of the specific guideline dated 02.05.2007 issued by the Department of Women and Child Development, Govt. of Odisha, as per para-7(ii)(i) of the said guideline, the appellate authority would be the Sub-Collector. The said provision is quoted herein:-

¶19

Sub-Collector will be the appellate authority for hearing complaints regarding selection of Anganwadi Workers of tribal and rural

¶20

// 2 //

¶21

projects and Addl. District Magistrate will be the appellate authority for complaints regarding selection of Anganwadi Workers for urban projects. Collector shall be the appellate authority in case SubCollector/ADM have approved the selection as per para ‘g’ and ‘h’ above.”

¶22

It is further submitted by the learned Standing Counsel that as the matter involves adjudication of disputed question of fact, the petitioner has more efficacious alternative remedy in the form of appeal before the Sub-Collector.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw the writ petition to approach the appellate authority. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is permitted to be withdrawn as prayed for. The appellate authority shall deal with the appeal in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.

¶24

(M.S. Sahoo) Judge

¶25

Page 2 of 2

Babita Behera v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babita Behera 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Asima Kumari Mishra Vs State of Odisha

Dr.Biswajit Barik Vs State of Odisha

Dr. Bharat Chandra Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Nutan Patel Vs the Controller of Examination, Sambalpur University

Shradhanjali Pradhan Vs Secy., Women and Child Development Dept, Orissa

Jayashree Hota Vs State of Odisha