A petition sought an order of regularization. Noting the petitioner's regularization by an order dated 29.6.2022 during pendency, the Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the respondents to issue the regularization order within one month.
Directing the State to issue a regularization order in favour of the petitioner within one month of receipt.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WPC(OA) No. 1671 of 2015
Abhiram Behera
Petitioner
-versus-
State of Odisha & Others
…. Opposite Parties
COROM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
ORDER
Order No 24.08.2022
1. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode.
2. Heard Mr. A. Rath, learned counsel for the petitoner and Mr. Y.S.P. Babu, learned A.G.A.
3. It is submitted that though during pendency of the matter the petitioners along with others have been regularized vide order dated 29.6.2022, but in view of the pendency of the matter, necessary order has not been issued in favour of the petitioner. The order dated 29.6.2022 produced by Mr. Rath, learned counsel for the petitioner in Court today be kept on record.
4. Considering the said fact, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to implement the order by issuing necessary order of regularization in favour of the petitioner within a period of one (1) month from the date of receipt of the order.
5. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of.
(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge
Sangita
// 2 //
Page 2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner, who was regularized by an order dated 29.6.2022 during pendency, should be issued a regularization order pending dismissal of the writ petition.
Abhiram Behera
State of Odisha
Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
