Disposed

Laxmidhar Sahoo v. Fci, New Delhi

Orissa HC27 Mar 2023WP(C)/5079/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition concerning pending promotion proceedings, the High Court of Orissa disposed of the matter by directing the opposite party to consider the petitioner's representation within two months in accordance with law, without expressing an opinion on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the opposite party to consider the petitioner's representation under Annexure-4 within two months and pass a speaking order.

Laxmidhar Sahoo Vs Fci, New Delhi — Service and Employment | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.5079 of 2023

¶3

Laxmidhar Sahoo

¶4

…. Petitioner

¶5

Mr. Brundaban Rout, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

Food Corporation of India, New …. Opp. Parties Delhi and others

¶8

Mr. N.K. Praharaj, AGA

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

27.03.2023

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

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

“It is therefore humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit this writ petition and further pleased to quash the order dt.17.3.2022 in respect of wrong preparation of seniority than the petitioner for giving promotion;

¶18

And further be pleased to direct the Opp. Parties more particularly Opposite Party No.2 to decide/consider the representation dtd. 15.4.2021 and 22.5.2022 under Annexure-4 series for ends of justice.

¶19

And pass such other order/orders, direction/directions as deem fit and proper.”

¶20

It is submitted by learned counsel for the Petitioner that although the Petitioner has filed representation under Annexure-4 before the Opposite Party No.2, but the same is still pending before

¶21

// 2 //

¶22

the said Opposite Party and the said Opposite Party has not taken any decision as of now.

¶23

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.

¶24

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.2 to consider the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-4 taking into consideration the vacancy position which is stated to have arisen on retirement and promotion of some employees in course of time, 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.

¶25

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

¶26

( A.K. Mohapatra) Judge

¶27

Debasis

Laxmidhar Sahoo v. Fci, New Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Laxmidhar Sahoo v. Fci, New Delhi

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

Jayant Kumar Panda Vs Yeshwant Kumar Jethwa, I.P.S.

Dr.P.P.K. Udayabhanu Vs State of Odisha

Gouranga Charan Mallick Vs Chief Executive Officer, Tata Power Central Odisha, Bbsr

Nanda Kishore Panda Vs State of Odisha

Ratnakar Neti Vs Supdt. of Police, Sundargarh

Raghabendra Patnaik Vs State of Odisha