Disposed

Babu Malika v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC29 Mar 2023WP(C)/9237/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of this Writ Petition by directing the respondent to consider both unreserved category petitioners and a reserved category applicant for promotion, placing them at par before deciding based on rival contentions within a reasonable timeframe.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner was directed to approach the Opposite Party No.1 along with a certified copy of this order, which must be acted upon immediately.

Babu Malika Vs State of Odisha — Service and Employment | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) 9237 of 2023

¶3

Babu Malika & others …. Petitioners Mr.B.Routray, Sr. Advocate

¶4

-versus-

¶5

State of Odisha & others

¶6

…. Opposite Party Mr.Saswat Das, A.G.A.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

29.03.2023

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

¶13

On oral prayer of the learned counsel for the Petitioner, he is permitted to carry out the correction in the cause title particularly, with regard to description of the parties. Let the correction be carried out in the Court today.

¶14

Heard Mr.B.Routray, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner as well as Mr.Saswat Das, learned Additional Government Advocate. Perused the Writ Petition as well as the documents annexed thereto.

¶15

The present Writ Petition has been filed with the following prayer:

¶16

“It is therefore, most humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court be graciously pleased to: i) Admit the writ application

¶17

ii) Call for the record.

¶18

iii) Issue RULE NISI calling upon the Opposite Parties to show cause as to why the clarification dated 3006.2022

¶19

// 2 //

¶20

issued by the ST & SC Development Department under Annexure-5 shall not be quashed

¶21

iv) If the Opposite Parties fail to show cause or show insufficient cause, issue a writ in the nature of certiorari by quashing clarification dated 30.06.2022 issued by the ST and SC Development Department under Annexure-5;

¶22

v) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ/writs direction/directions directing the Opposite Parties to consider the case of the Petitioners for promotion to the post of Assistant Executive Engineers in terms of the final gradation list dated 11.03.2022 against the UR post without adjusting/diverting it to the ST/STC category candidates by following the provisions of the ORV Act, 1975 and the rules made thereunder.

¶23

vi) And/or pass such other order/orders, direction/directions as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper for the ends of justice.:

¶24

Mr.Routray, learned senior counsel appearing for the Petitioners submitted that all the Petitioners belong to unreserved category. He further contended that in the earlier Writ Petition filed at the instance of the reserved category candidate, baring W.P.(C) No.30131 of 2022, this Court after considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, disposed of the matter on 15.11.2022 with a direction to the Petitioner in that case to approach the Opposite Party No.1, who shall consider the representation of the Petitioner dated 20.08.2022. Therefore, it is argued that while considering the case of the Petitioner in WP.(C) No.30131 of 2022 the cases of the Petitioners be also considered. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Petitioners submitted that the cases of the Petitioners also be considered along with the case of Bijay Kumar Sethi in W.P.(C) No.30131 of 2022.

¶25

Learned Additional Government Advocate has no objection in the event a decision is taken by the Government after considering the representation of both sides and taking into consideration the rival

¶26

// 3 //

¶27

contentions, in accordance with law within a stipulated period of time.

¶28

Considering such submissions made by the learned senior counsel appearing for the Petitioners as well as the learned Additional Government Advocate and upon a careful examination of the background facts of the present case, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the Writ Petition by directing the Opposite Party No.1 to consider the representation of the Petitioners dated 09.03.2023 under Annexure-6 series to the Writ Petition along with the representation of the Petitioner in Bijay Kumar Sethi’s case (W.P.(C) No.30131 of 2022). The Opposite Party No.1 is further directed to consider the rival contentions to be raised by both sides and take a decision in accordance with law within a period of three months from today and dispose of the representation by passing a speaking and reasoned order. The Petitioners are directed to approach the Opposite Party No.1 along with certified copy of this order. On production of certified copy of this order, the Opposite Party No1 shall carry out the dir ection given herein above.

¶29

With the aforesaid observation/direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

¶30

Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.

¶31

( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge

¶32

RKS

Babu Malika v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babu Malika 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

Biswabandita Swain Vs Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Bbsr

Union of India Vs State of Odisha

Union of India Vs State of Odisha

Dilip Kumar Bhoi Vs State of Odisha

Sadasiva Pati Vs Union of India

Iswar Chandra Sahoo Vs State of Odisha