Disposed

Bibhuprada Das v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC15 Mar 2023WP(C)/24860/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Orissa disposed of a writ petition by directing the opposite party to consider the petitioner's pending representation and afford a hearing opportunity before deciding on the allegations of disengagement from service, under the government ordinance.

What did the court decide?

Direction to opposite party No.1 to consider the petitioner's representation and grant an opportunity of hearing before disposal within four weeks.

Bibhuprada Das 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. 24860 of 2017

Bibhuprada Das

…

Petitioner

M/s. B.K.Nayak, Advocate

¶7

-Versus -

¶8

State of Odisha & ors

¶9

…. Opposite Parties Additional Standing counsel

¶10

CORAM: JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA ORDER

15.03.2023

Order No.

03.

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶15

Heard Mr. B.K. Nayak and Mr. B.K. Sharma learned counsel appearing for the opposite parties.

¶16

The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayer:

¶17

It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that your lordship may graciously be pleased to admit this writ petition and issue Rule NISI to the opp.parties to show cause as to why the impugned order of disengagement under Annexure-4 shall not be quashed and further the petitioner shall not be reinstated into his service; And on their failing to show cause or showing insufficient cause issue a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 24.08.2017 in Annexure-4;

¶18

And further a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ(s) be issued directing the opp.parties to re-instate the petitioner into his services within a stipulated period; And pass such further order/orders direction/directions as may deem fit and proper; And for which act of kindness, the petitioner as in duty bound shall every pray.

¶19

The facts relevant for deciding the writ application are that the

¶20

petitioner was engaged as Hindi Teacher in Ekalavya Model

¶21

¶22

Residential School on contractual basis by order dated 24.11.2011 passed by the Collector, Koraput. He was disengaged from service on certain allegations by order dated 24.08.2017, enclosed as Anexure-4. Being aggrieved, the petitioner approached the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, to the Government in SC & ST Development Department, Bhubaneswar by submitting several representations. One of such representation is enclosed as Annexure6 series, submitted on 13.10.2017 by registered post. It is submitted that no action has been taken on the said representation as yet.

¶23

Considering the fact that the decision in this regard is to be taken at the first instance by the concerned authority before whom representation is said to be pending, the writ application is disposed of directing opposite party No.1 to consider and dispose of the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of this order or on production of certified copy thereof by the petitioner. Further, an opportunity of hearing should also be granted to the petitioner before disposal of the representation.

¶24

(Sashikanta Mishra)
Judge

¶25

Deepak

¶26

Bibhuprada Das v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bibhuprada Das 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

Mala Bewa and Ors. Vs Atmaram Agarwalla

Dr.Sharon Nayak@Sharon Enosh Steward Vs State of Odisha(Vig.)

Jalendra Ku.Paramani Vs State

Soren @ Surendra Digal Vs State of Odisha

Fakir Mohan Behera Vs State

Puspalata Swain Vs Dean of Research