The High Court disposed of a writ petition where the petitioner requested cash-based rehabilitation assistance. The Court held that since reasons for exclusion were not pleaded, no prima facie case existed, and the remedy lay before the concerned authority to inquire into the grievance.
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. 31424 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
Raghumani Harijan @ Raghunath ….. Petitioner Domb
Mr. R.R. Mishra, Adv.
Vs.
State of Odisha and others ….. Opposite Parties Mr. H.M. Dhal, AGA
CORAM:
DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI MR. JUSTICE B.P. SATAPATHY
ORDER 06.12.2022
Page 1 of 2
nothing has been indicated in the pleadings itself. In any case, if the petitioner has any grievance, he may approach the authority concerned as to why his name has not been included in the list, while similarly situated persons have been extended with the benefits. Instead of approaching the appropriate authority, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition, which cannot sustain in the eye of law.
(DR. B.R. SARANGI) JUDGE
(B.P. SATAPATHY) JUDGE
Ashok
Page 2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition seeking directions for cash-based rehabilitation assistance which requires approaching the appropriate authority for reasons of exclusion can sustain.
Raghumani Harijan @ Raghunath
State of Odisha
DR. B.R. SARANGI
B.P. SATAPATHY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
