Disposed

Prakash Bhisar v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC14 Dec 2022WP(C)/31279/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ application seeking regularization of service for the petitioner as a sweeper. The petitioner's representation with the Sambalpur Municipal Corporation was pending. The court directed the corporation to consider the representation within eight weeks and pass a speaking and reasoned order, citing relevant precedents.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Sambalpur Municipal Corporation to consider the petitioner's pending representation and pass a speaking and reasoned order within eight weeks.

Prakash Bhisar Vs State of Odisha — Public Procurement and Tenders | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.31279 of 2022

¶3

Prakash Bhisar

¶4

…. Petitioner Mr.B.B.Swain, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha & others

¶7

…. Opposite Parties

¶8

Mr. B.P. Tripathy, AGA

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

14.12.2022

This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).

¶16

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State-Opposite Parties.

¶17

The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the following prayer:-

¶18

“Therefore, the Petitioner most humbly prays that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue Rule NISI calling upon the Opposite Parties to show cause as to why: i) the Opposite Parties shall not be directed to regularize the service of the Petitioner against existing vacancy as sweeper in the Sambalpur Municipal Corporation; ii) the Opp. Parties shall not be directed to pay the arrear and present salary attached to the post of regular sweeper and all other consequential service benefits attached to the said post; iii) non-consideration of the case of the Petitioner shall not be held as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law;

¶19

And if the Opposite Parties fail to show cause or show insufficient cause the Rule shall be made absolute;

¶20

// 2 //

¶21

And pass any other order/orders, direction/directions as may be deemed just and proper.”

¶22

In course of hearing of the writ application, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner ventilating his grievance has submitted representation before the Commissioner, Sambalpur Municipal Corporation, Opposite Party No.2 on 24.05.2022 under Annexure-2. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the said representation is pending as of now. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that a direction be issued to the Opposite Party No.2 to consider the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-2 within a stipulated period of time.

¶23

Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State-Opposite Parties submits that he has no objection if the representation of the Petitioner is considered by the Opposite Party No.2, which is stated to be pending, in accordance with law within a stipulated period of time.

¶24

Considering the limited nature of grievance of the Petitioner, the writ application is disposed of at the stage of admission with a direction to the Opposite Party No.2 to consider the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-2 in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. The Opposite Party No.2 shall do well to dispose of the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-2 by passing a speaking and reasoned order keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Secretary, State of Karnataka –v.- Uma Devi, reported in (2006) 4 SCC 1 and State of Karnataka -v.- M.L. Kesari, reported in (2010) 9 SCC 247 as well as by this Court in case of Basanta Kumar Barik -v.- State of Odisha and others (WPC(OA) No.616 of 2017 decided on 26.11.2021).

¶25

With the aforesaid observation, the writ application stands

¶26

// 3 //

¶27

disposed of.

¶28

Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.

¶29

( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge

¶30

Debasis

Prakash Bhisar v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prakash Bhisar 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

Amiya Kumar Patel Vs State of Odisha

Baidehi Rout Vs State of Odisha

Meenarani Singh Vs State of Odisha

Purnima Dunguri Vs State of Odisha

Biraj Mohan Mohanty Vs State of Odisha

Beda Kumbhar Vs State of Odisha