Disposed

Urmila Swain v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC15 Feb 2023WP(C)/3828/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition seeking directions to fix seniority and grant benefits due to service interruption. It directed the respondent to consider the petitioner's pending representation on the matter within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Opposite Party No.2 to consider the pending representation of the Petitioner and pass a reasoned order within eight weeks.

Urmila Swain Vs State of Odisha — Service and Employment | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.3828 of 2023

¶3

Urmila Swain

¶4

…. Petitioner Mr.S.B.Jena, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha and others

¶7

…. Opposite Parties Mr.R.N.Mishra, A.G.A.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

01.

15.02.2023

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

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as the learned Additional Government Advocate.

¶16

The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the following prayer:

¶17

“ Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, it is therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ/writs by directing the Opp.Parties to fix up the seniority of Petitioner taking into consideration her appointment of the year 2009 as per the merit list.

¶18

Further be pleased to direct the Opp.Parties to grant all consequential financial and service benefits as for no fault of her she has been restrained from discharging her duties for 11 days.

¶19

Or pass such other order/orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

¶20

In course of hearing of the writ application, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner ventilating her grievance has submitted representation before the Director General and Inspector General of Police, Opposite Party No.2 under Annexure-7 on

¶21

// 2 //

¶22

21.07.2021. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the said representation is pending as of now. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that a direction be issued to the Opposite Party No.2 to consider the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-7 within a stipulated period of time.

¶23

Learned Additional Government Advocate submits that he has no objection if the representation of the Petitioner is considered by the Opposite Party No.2, which is stated to be pending, in accordance with law within a stipulated period of time.

¶24

Considering the limited nature of grievance of the Petitioner, the writ application is disposed of at the stage of admission with a direction to the Opposite Party no.2 to consider the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-7 in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. The Opposite Party No.2 shall do well to dispose of the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-7 by passing a speaking and reasoned order.

¶25

With the aforesaid observation, the writ application stands disposed of.

¶26

Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.

¶27

RKS

¶28

( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge

Urmila Swain v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Urmila Swain 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

Sonalin Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

N.I.Co.Ltd Vs Ramesh Ch.Sahoo

Pitambar Nayak Vs State of Odisha

Jagannath Behera Vs State of Odisha

Aswini Kumar Das Vs State of Odisha

Mahato Kujur Vs State of Odisha