Disposed

Birabara Majhi v. I.G.of Police,Crpf

Orissa HC6 May 2022WP(C)/35/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition challenging a notice to vacate government quarters, the Court did not decide the substantive claim. Instead, it directed the petitioner to submit a comprehensive representation to the respondent within two weeks and restrained coercive eviction measures pending the decision on that representation.

What did the court decide?

Directed the petitioner to submit a comprehensive representation within two weeks; no coercive eviction measures until a decision on the grievance is taken.

Birabara Majhi Vs I.G.of Police,Crpf — Service and Employment | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No. 35 OF 2014

¶3

Birabara Majhi Petitioner

¶4

Mr. Biren S. Tripathy, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

…. The Inspector General of Police, Opp. Parties Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), Eastern Sector, Kolkata and others

¶7

Mr. Prasanna Kumar Parhi, Assistant Solicitor General

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

06.05.2022

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶15

The Petitioner in this writ petition seeks to assail the notice dated 14^th December, 2013 (Annexure-3) issued by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF)-cum-Estate Officer, Group Centre, CRPF, BhubaneswarOpposite Party No.2, whereby he directed to vacate Quarters No.65 Type-I Special within a period of fifteen days.

¶16

Mr. Tripathy, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that when the Petitioner was posted at Bhubaneswar during 2008, he was allotted with an official Quarters No.65 Type-I Special. Subsequently, he was transferred to Jammu and Kashmir. In view of the guidelines issued by the Head Office of CRPF, he is entitled to retain the Quarters since he was posted in Jammu and Kashmir or in LWE area. Hence, the Petitioner is entitled to occupy the said Quarters till his continuance in Jammu and Kashmir or in LWE area. Without considering the same, the impugned notice under

¶17

Page 1 of 3

¶18

// 2 //

¶19

Annexure-3 has been issued directing the Petitioner to vacate the Quarters within a period of fifteen days.

¶20

Considering such submission, this Court vide order dated 15^th January, 2014 directed not to evict the Petitioner from the quarters in question till the next listing and the said order is still continuing.

¶21

In course of hearing, Mr. Tripathy, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that in the meantime, some developments have taken place and interest of justice will be best served, if the Petitioner submits a comprehensive representation to the Opposite Party No.2 for consideration. He further prays that till disposal of the representation, his continuance in the Quarters No.65 Type-I Special may not be disturbed.

¶22

Mr. Parhi, learned ASG appearing for the CRPF contended that the Petitioner is not entitled to occupy the said Quarters beyond seven years of his posting either in Jammu and Kashmir or in LWE area. Due to his unauthorized occupation, he was issued with the notice of vacation, which was not complied with. Hence, finding no other alternative, notice under Annexure-3 has been issued. He, therefore, submits that the writ petition merits no consideration and is liable to be dismissed.

¶23

Taking into consideration the rival contentions of the parties, this Court is of the considered view that since the Petitioner is in occupation of Government Family Quarters and due to the developments interregnum, he intends to submit a grievance petition before the Opposite Party No.2, an opportunity in that regard should be given to the Petitioner.

¶24

Page 2 of 3

¶25

// 3 //

¶26

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction that in the event the Petitioner submits a comprehensive representation before the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF)-cum-Estate Officer, Group Centre, CRPF, Bhubaneswar-Opposite Party No.2 within a period of two weeks hence along with certified copy of this order, the same shall be considered in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of one month therefrom.

¶27

Till a decision is taken on the grievance petition, if submitted by the Petitioner within the stipulated time as above, no coercive measure shall be taken pursuant to the notice under Annexure-3 for eviction of the Petitioner, if he has not been

¶28

evicted in the meantime.

¶29

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. (K.R. Mohapatra) Judge

¶30

¶31

Page 3 of 3

Birabara Majhi v. I.G.of Police,Crpf

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Birabara Majhi v. I.G.of Police,Crpf

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

Raj Kishore Sahoo Vs the Commnr, Consolidation, Odisha

Rajendra Ku.Patra Vs Lilima Dhal

Ram Tudu Vs Sana @Sanamati Tudu

Bharat B.Parida Vs I.G.of Police,Crpf

Bijay Ku.Tripathy Vs Santilata Mishra

Narayan Sahoo Vs Arnapurna Sahoo