Disposed

Saroj Kanta Pradhan v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC19 Sept 2022WP(C)/23428/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, former Headmaster, filed a writ petition seeking government orders for scholarship sanction and reimbursement of mess charges paid for 62 students denied scholarships due to delayed caste certificates. Court disposed petition by directing concerned authority to consider pending representations.

What did the court decide?

Direction to concerned authority to consider and dispose of petitioner's representations within three weeks.

Saroj Kanta Pradhan Vs State of Odisha — Service and Employment | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

WP(C) No. 23428 of 2022

¶3

Saroj Kanta Pradhan

¶4

…. Petitioner

¶5

Mr. Anil Kumar Das,

¶6

Advocate

¶7

-Versus -

¶8

State of Odisha and others ….

¶9

Opposite Parties

¶10

Mr. N.K. Praharaj, Additional Government Advocate

¶11

CORAM: JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA

¶12

ORDER_ 19.09.2022

¶13

Order No.

¶14

¶15

This matter is taken up through virtual mode.

¶16

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

¶17

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following relief:-

¶18

“It is, therefore prayed that your lordships may be pleased to direct the State/Ops for issue of Govt. orders for sanction of Pre-Matric Scholarship of 62 ST & SC students of Jakeda Ashram School for the year 2015-16 as per details furnished under Annexures- 1 and 4 and reimburse of Rs.4,62,607/- to the petitioner towards messing charges of 62 students borne by the petitioner for want of sanction & drawl of pre-matric scholarship for 2015-16 of 62 students and dispose of the representation under Annexure-5.

¶19

And pass any other order/orders as deemed fit and proper in the ends of justice, equity and good conscience.

¶20

And for this act of kindness, the petitioner shall as in duty bound ever pray.”

¶21

Page 1 of 3

¶22

The petitioner was working as Headmaster in Jakeda Ashram School from year 2009 to 2015-16. It is stated that the pre-matric scholarship of the students of the Ashram school was released except in case of 62 students on the ground that they had not submitted their caste certificates in time. Since the said students belonged to other district and mostly from interior areas, they could not submit the certificates in time. The petitioner was transferred to Government Girls High School, Buguda in the year, 2016. Till such time, he claims to have paid the mess charges of the students amounting to Rs.4,62,607/- from his own pocket. The District Welfare Officer, Nayagarh vide letter dated 08.06.2016 while submitting a second list of ST boarders of the school in favour of whom a pre-matric scholarship had not been sanctioned for non-submission of caste certificates, also mentioned that the expenditure had already been done and it should be sanctioned for adjustment. In the meantime, the petitioner has retired on attaining the age of superannuation. Ventilating his grievance, the petitioner had approached the District Welfare Officer by submitting a representation on 08.06.2022 as also representation submitted to the opposite party No.3 on 02.08.2022. These representations are said to be pending. 5. Considering the fact that the issues raised in the writ petition are all factual issues and can be addressed adequately by the concerned authority, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to opposite party no.3 to consider and dispose of the

¶23

Page 2 of 3

¶24

representation of the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of three weeks from the date of communication of this order or on production of certified copy thereof by the petitioner. If the contention of the petitioner is found to be correct, necessary orders may be passed in his favour regarding reimbursement of the amount said to have been paid by him.

¶25

The writ petition is disposed of.

¶26

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

¶27

( Sashikanta Mishra)

¶28

Judge

¶29

B.C. Tudu

¶30

Page 3 of 3

Saroj Kanta Pradhan v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saroj Kanta 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Radhakrushna Jena Vs State of Odisha

Babul @ Bapun @ Gobardhan Bantha Vs State of Odisha

Dubraj Kerketta Vs State of Odisha

Bharat Chhualsingh Vs State of Odisha

Mitra Mohapatra Vs State of Odisha

Niranjan Sethi Vs State of Odisha