Rasaratna Satapathy Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Rasaratna Satapathy Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to Opposite Party No.2 (Collector-cum-District Coordinate Officer, Subarnapur) to consider the Petitioner's representation under Annexure-4 series, taking into consideration the order dated 10.05.2018 in W.P.(C) No.6661 of 2018, within eight weeks of production of certified copy, by a speaking and reasoned order, and to communicate the decision to the Petitioner within two weeks thereof. The principal prayer to quash the order dated 22.10.2019 was not itself decided.

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 22.10.2019 (Annexure-2) passed by Opposite Party No.3 should be quashed and the Petitioner directed to be allowed to continue in his job as Data Entry Operator in Ullunda Block. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Considering the limited nature of grievance, the writ application is disposed of at the stage of admission with a direction to Opposite Party No.2 to consider the Petitioner's representation under Annexure-4 series, taking into consideration the order dated 10.05.2018 in W.P.(C) No.6661 of 2018, within eight weeks from production of certified copy of the order.

Key takeaways

Opposite Party No.2 shall dispose of the Petitioner's representation under Annexure-4 by passing a speaking and reasoned order.ratio¶25
The decision taken on the representation is to be communicated to the Petitioner within two weeks from the date of taking such decision.ratio¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (WP(C) No.11427 of 2024, High Court of Orissa) disposed of at the stage of admission. The Petitioner, working as Data Entry Operator in Ullunda Block, had sought quashing of the order dated 22.10.2019 (Annexure-2) passed by Opposite Party No.3 and continuation in service. Noting that his representation (Annexure-4 series) was pending before the Collector-cum-District Coordinate Officer, Subarnapur (Opposite Party No.2), and that the Additional Standing Counsel had no objection, the Court (A.K. Mohapatra, J.) directed Opposite Party No.2 to consider the representation within eight weeks of production of the certified copy, taking into consideration the order dated 10.05.2018 passed in W.P.(C) No.6661 of 2018, by a speaking and reasoned order, and to communicate the decision to the Petitioner within two weeks of taking it.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.11427 of 2024

Rasaratna Satapathy

..... Petitioner

Represented By Adv. - Sailabala Jena

-versus-

1) State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Parties

1. Collector-cum- Dist-co-ordinate Officer, Subarnapur 3) Project Director, Dist Rural Development Agency, Subarnapur

Represented By Adv. – Mr.D.Mohapatra, ASC

1. Block Development Officer

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

Order No.

ORDER

08.05.2024

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

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State.

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

“ It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this

Hon’ble Court may be pleased to quash order dated 22.10.2019 vide Annexure-2 passed by Opp.Party No.3 and thereby be pleased to give a direction to the Opp.Parties particularly Opp.PartyNo.2 to 4 to allow the Petitioner to continue in his job as Data Entry

Page 1 of 3.

Operator in Ullunda Block.

This Hon’ble Court may also be pleased to pass any other further order/orders as deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

In course of hearing of the writ application, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner ventilating his grievance has submitted representation before the Collector-cum-District Coordinate Officer, Subarnapur, Opposite Party No.2 under Annexure4 series. 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-4 series within a stipulated period of time.

Learned Additional Standing Counsel 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.

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-4 series taking into consideration the order dated 10.05.2018 passed in W.P.(C) No.6661 of 2018 under Annexure-3, 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-4 by passing a speaking and reasoned order. The decision so taken on the representation of the Petitioner be communicated to

Page 2 of 3.

the Petitioner within two weeks from the date of taking such decision.

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

Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.

( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge

RKS

Page 3 of 3. Digitally Signed Signed by: RAMESH KUMAR SINGH Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 09-May-2024 17:58:53

Signature Not Verified