Dismissed

Ramakanta Behera v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC9 Mar 2023WP(C)/5636/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition regarding Group-C post promotion and service benefits, the High Court of Orissa directed the opposite party to decide on the petitioner's plea within three months without expressing any opinion on the merits. The petition was subsequently disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Direction to opposite party No.3 to decide on the petitioner's petition within three months.

Ramakanta Behera Vs State of Odisha — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.5636 of 2023

Ramakanta Behera

Petitioner

-versus-

State of Odisha & Others

¶6

Opp. Parties

¶7

CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

ORDER

Order

09.03.2023

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

¶13

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶14

3 . The Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition with the following prayer: -

¶15

“In the above facts and circumstances this petitioner therefore humbly prays that:-

¶16

A) Your Lordships may graciously be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/ may issue RULE NISI calling upon the opposite parties, as to why this petitioner shall not be promoted to the Group-C post with effect from the date of his junior’s promotion, if they fail or fail to show sufficient cause thereon in the time limit, make the RULE absolute;

¶17

B) May issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ commanding to the Opposite parties to allow all service benefits with effect from date of his promotion as deem fit and proper in the interest of justice within a time limit;

¶18

C) May pass such other relief (s) as this Hon’ble High Court deems just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be granted.”

¶19

// 2 //

¶20

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that through highlighting his grievances, the petitioner has filed a representation vide Annexure-8 to the Writ Petition, but till date nothing has been done in the matter. In such background, he prays that a direction be issued to opposite party No.3 to take a decision on the above noted petition within a specific time period.

¶21

5. Considering the submissions made and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court directs opposite party No.3 to take a decision on the above noted petition in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order and communicate the result of such exercise to the petitioner.

¶22

The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶23

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy)
Judge

¶24

Basudev

¶25

Page 2 of 2

Ramakanta Behera v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramakanta Behera 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

Dr. Nalini Kanta Barpanda Vs State of Odisha

Dr. Prabhat Kumar Sahu Vs State of Odisha

Aswini Kumar Dash Vs State of Odisha

Dr. Rajib Padhee Vs State of Odisha

Dr. Ram Naresh Mahaling Vs State of Odisha

Pramod Kumar Pradhan Vs State of Odisha