Disposed

Susanta Kumar Jena v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC21 Jun 2023WP(C)/16722/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Odisha, without expressing an opinion on merits, directed the respondent authority to consider the petitioner's pending representation for absorption as a Pharmacist within two months through a reasoned order, with a requirement to communicate the decision within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Opposite Party No.4 to consider the petitioner's representation for absorption as Pharmacist within two months via a speaking and reasoned order; decision communication within two weeks.

Susanta Kumar Jena Vs State of Odisha — Service and Employment | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.16722 of 2023

¶3

Susanta Kumar Jena

¶4

…. Petitioner Mr. S.K. Das, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

…. State of Odisha and others Opp. Parties Mr. Saswat Das, A.G.A.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

21.06.2023

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

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State-Opposite Parties.

¶15

The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner with the following prayers:-

¶16

“Under the above circumstances, it is therefore humbly prayed that the Hon’ble Court be graciously pleased to direct the Opposite Pary No.4 to absorb the petitioner on regular basis as Pharmacist as that has been done in the case of Sri Alok Kumar Routray and one Rama Chandra Muduli (Attendant) of the same district and to grant him all consequential service and financial benefits within a stipulated period as deem fit and proper;

¶17

And/or pass any other appropriate writ/writs, order/orders and direction/directions in the fitness of the case.”

¶18

// 2 //

¶19

It is submitted by learned counsel for the Petitioner that although the Petitioner has filed representation under Annexure-10 before the Opposite Party No.4, but the same is still pending before the said Opposite Party and the said Opposite Party has not taken any decision as of now.

¶20

Learned counsel for the State submits that he has no objection, if a direction is given to the authority concerned to consider the representation of the Petitioner in accordance with law within a stipulated period of time.

¶21

Considering the submissions made by the respective parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court disposes of the writ petition at the stage of admission with a direction to the Opposite Party No.4 to consider the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-10 in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. It is needless to mention here that the representation of the Petitioner shall be considered and disposed of by passing a speaking and reasoned order. Any decision so taken on the said representation shall be communicated to the Petitioner within a period of two weeks thereafter.

¶22

( A.K. Mohapatra)

¶23

Judge

¶24

Debasis

¶25

Signature Not Verified

¶26

Digitally Signed Signed by: DEBASIS AECH Designation: PA Reason: Authentication Location: OHC CUTTACK Date: 22-Jun-2023 20:35:26

Susanta Kumar Jena v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Susanta Kumar Jena 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

Priyanka Swain Vs State of Odisha

Manoranjan Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Manoranjan Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Tankadhar Meher Vs State of Odisha

Bhimsen Malik Vs State of Odisha

Laxman Charan Nandi Vs State of Odisha