Disposed

Bhaskar Nayak v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC20 Mar 2023WP(C)/1014/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by a retired petitioner challenging his suspension and subsequent charges. Without expressing an opinion on merits, the court granted liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation of grievances within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to petitioner to submit representation within two weeks for a decision within four weeks.

Bhaskar Nayak Vs State of Odisha — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C). No. 1014 of 2017

Bhaskar Nayak

…

Petitioner

Mr. P.P. Mohanty, Advocate

¶7

-Versus -

¶8

State of Odisha & Ors

¶9

….

¶10

Opposite Parties

¶11

Additional Standing Counsel

¶12

CORAM:

¶13

JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA ORDER

20.03.2023

Order No.s

05.

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶18

The petitioner while in service was placed under suspension

¶19

by opposite party No.4 by order dated 04.11.2016 and charge was framed on 26.11.2016. At this stage the petitioner approached this Court seeking the following relief:

¶20

It is therefore, most humbly prayed that this Hon’ble

¶21

Court be graciously pleased to

¶22

i) Admit the writ application.

¶23

ii) Call for the record.

¶24

iii) Issue Rule Nisi calling upon the opposite parties to show cause as to why the impugned order of suspension passed by opposite party No.4 dated 04.11.2016 and the so-called charge framed by opposite party No.4 against the petitioner on 26.11.2016 under Annexure-4 and 5 shall not be quashed.

¶25

Iv) If the opposite parties fail to show cause or show insufficient cause make the rule absolute and issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ/writs direction/direction quashing the impugned order of suspension passed by opposite party No.4 dated 04.11.2016 and the so-called charge framed by opposite party No.4 against the petitioner on 26.11.2016 under Annexure-4 and 5.

¶26

V) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ/writs direction/directions directing the opposite parties, not to take any action against the petitioner

¶27

Page 1 of 1

¶28

pursuant to the frivolous charges framed against him and the petitioner may be allowed to continue against the post of Duftary as before and further declare the action of the opposite party No.4 in placing the spetitioner under suspension and taking disciplinary action against him are invalid and inoperative and without authority of law and the petitioner be entitled to receive all consequential service benefit as against the post of Duftary within a reasonable time to be stipulated by this Hon’ble Court.

¶29

Vi) And/or pass any other order/orders, direction/directions as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper for the ends of justice.

¶30

And for the said act of kindness, the petitioner as in duty bound shall every pray.

¶31

It is submitted that the petitioner has since retired on

¶32

attaining age of superannuation.

¶33

It is therefore submitted by Mr. Routray, learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner may be granted liberty to submit representation highlighting his grievances in this regard.

¶34

Considering the submissions as above and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the writ application is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to submit representation highlighting his grievances in this regard before opposite party No.4 within a period of two weeks. If such representation is filed within the stipulated period, the opposite party No.4 shall take a decision thereon in accordance with law within a further period of four weeks.

¶35

(Sashikanta Mishra)

Judge

Deepak

Page 2 of 1

Page 3 of 1

Bhaskar Nayak v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhaskar Nayak 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

Lingaraj Naik Vs State of Orissa

Iswar @ Indra @ Indramani Meher Vs State of Odisha

Himansu Sharma Vs State of Odisha

Kartika Bhukta Vs State of Orissa

Sarat Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Jayanti Panda Vs State and Ors.