Disposed

Chandrakala Sahu v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC15 Jul 2022WPC(OAC)/136/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment is an interim order in a writ petition challenging the exclusion of the petitioner from a gradation list and service benefits. The High Court did not dispose of the matter on merits but granted the petitioner liberty to submit a fresh representation enclosing relevant documents within three weeks. It directed the respondent to consider the representation and pass a lawful decision wi

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to make a fresh representation before Opposite Party No.2 within three weeks; Respondent directed to decide within three months.

Chandrakala Sahu Vs State of Odisha — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C)(OAC) No.136 of 2016

Chandrakala Sahu

….

Petitioner

-versus-

State of Odisha & Ors.

¶8

…. Opposite Parties

¶9

CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

¶10

ORDER 15.07.2022

¶11

Order No

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

3. The Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition for the following reliefs:

¶15

In view of the facts mentioned in paragraph-6, the applicant prays for the following relief(s):-

¶16

a) Admit the Original Application.

¶17

b) Call for the records.

¶18

c) To quash the letter dated -10.12.2015 under Annexure-8 in so far as its applicability to the present applicant or in alternative necessary declaration be made in declaring that the letter dated 10.12.2015 of the Director, Elementary Education, Orissa, has no application to the present applicant.

¶19

d) Further direction be issued to include the name of the present applicant in the gradation list and to release all service benefits including revised ACP, promotion etc.”

¶20

// 2 //

¶21

4. However, taking into account the claim raised in the present Writ Petition, liberty is granted to the Petitioner to make a fresh representation before Opp. Party No.2 by enclosing all the relevant documents and citations in support of his claim, if any, within a period of three weeks hence.

¶22

5. It is observed that if such a representation is filed within the aforesaid period, Opp. Party No.2 shall do well to take a lawful decision on the same within a period of three months from the date of receipt of such representation. The order so passed by the Opp. Party No.2 be communicated to the petitioner.

¶23

6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the Writ Petition is

¶24

disposed of.
(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy)
Judge
Sneha

¶25

Page 2 of 2

Chandrakala Sahu v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandrakala Sahu 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prasanta Kumar Pati Vs State of Orissa

Nilima Jena Vs State of Orissa

Abhaya Charan Nayak Vs State of Orissa

Director of Fisherie Vs M/S.Mechem P.Ltd

Sarita Dalal Vs State of Odisha

Diptimayee Mukharjee Vs State of Odisha