Dismissed

Kalpataru Rout v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC17 Aug 2022WPC(OA)/2470/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court directed Opposite Party No. 2 to decide the petitioner's application for service regularization within three months from the date of receipt of the order and to communicate the result. The writ petition was disposed of without merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Opposite Party No. 2 to take a decision on the petitioner's regularization application within three months and communicate the result.

Kalpataru Rout Vs State of Odisha — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C)(OA) No.2470 of 2016

Kalpataru Rout

Petitioners

-versus-

State of Odisha & Ors.

¶7

…. Opposite Parties

¶8

CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

¶9

ORDER

¶10

17.08.2022

¶11

Order No 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode.

¶12

2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the Opposite Parties.

¶13

3 . The Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition with the following prayer:-

¶14

“ (i) the Hon’ble Tribunal be pleased to direct the State Respondents to consider the case of the Applicant for regularization of his services by way of absorption under the regular establishment keeping in view the undisputed fact that he has uninterruptedly continued for last more than 15 years in the rank of Groundsman on DLR basis and more particularly in view of the fact that the nature of duties he is discharging is permanent in nature and on such basis the Hon’ble Tribunal be further pleased to direct that the Applicant shall be given all consequential services and financial benefits as due and admissible to him; and

¶15

(ii) The Hon’ble Tribunal be pleased to pass such other order/orders as is deemed fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case.”

¶16

// 2 //

¶17

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submits that through highlighting his grievances, the petitioner has filed an application at Annexure-5 to the Writ Petition before the O.P. No.2, but till date nothing has been done in the matter. In such background, learned counsel for the Petitioner prays that a direction be issued to Opposite Party No.2 to take a decision on the above noted Petition within a specific time period.

¶18

5. Considering the submissions made and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court directs Opposite Party No.2 to take a decision on the above noted petition in accordance with law within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of this order and communicate the result of such exercise to the Petitioner.

¶19

6 . The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Sneha

¶20

Page 2 of 2

Kalpataru Rout v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kalpataru Rout 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Akshaya Kumar Das Vs State of Odisha

Jyotiraj Padman Acharya Vs State of Odisha

Bibhusmita Mahapatra Vs State of Odisha

Sibani Guha Vs State of Odisha

S.Naresh Rao Vs Principal Secy.to Govt.of Odisha

Bidyut Prava Devi Vs State of Odisha