Disposed

Chanchala Prusty v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC21 May 2024WP(C)/12912/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition by an Assistant Primary School Teacher seeking regularization of service and differential arrear salaries under a 2016 Gazette Notification and a prior High Court judgment. The court permitted the petitioner to make a fresh representation to Opposite Party No.2, who was directed to decide it lawfully within three months.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to make fresh representation to Opp. Party No.2; direction to decide it within three months.

Chanchala Prusty Vs State of Odisha — Service and Employment | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

WP(C ) NO.12912 of 2024

¶3

Chanchala Prusty ..... Petitioner

¶4

Mr. U. Sahoo, Adv.

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha & Others

¶7

..... Opposite Parties Mr. S. Rath, ASC

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

ORDER

21.05.2024

Order No.1

1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶13

2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned

¶14

State Counsel for the Opposite Parties.

¶15

3. Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition inter alia with the following prayer:

¶16

Your Lordships may graciously be pleased to issue notices, call for the records and after hearing the parties, also be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ/writs/order/orders commanding to the Opposite Parties for regularization of petitioner’s service as Level-V Asst. Primary School Teacher in accordance with the Gazette Notification No.25290-XIII-SME-AE06/2016/S & ME dated 22.12.2016 issued by the Department of School and Mass Education, Govt. of Odisha and the Hon’ble Orissa High Court’s Judgment dtd.11.11.2022 passed in W.P.(C ) No.15345/2022 (Balabhadra Majhi v. State of Odisha and Others) with effect from the date of his eligibility within a time limit, as the Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the interest of justice.

¶17

(ii) May also graciously be pleased to pass an ORDER commanding to the Oppoiste Parties to allow his differential

¶18

arrear salaries with effect from the date of his regularization and other consequential service benefits accordingly within a time limit as the Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper n the interest of justice.

¶19

4. However, taking into account the claim raised in the present Writ Petition, liberty is granted to the Petitioner to make a fresh representation before Opp. Party No.2 by enclosing all the relevant documents and citations in support of his claim, if any, within a period three weeks hence.

¶20

5. It is observed that if such a representation is filed within the aforesaid period, Opp. Party No.2 shall do well to take a lawful decision on the same within a period of three months from the date of receipt of such representation. The order so passed by the Opp. Party No.2 be communicated to the petitioner.

¶21

With the aforesaid observation and direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶22

( BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge

¶23

sangita

¶24

Signature Not Verified

¶25

Digitally Signed Signed by: SANGITA PATRA Reason: authentication of order Location: high court of orissa, cut tack Date: 23-May-2024 12:32:48

Chanchala Prusty v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chanchala Prusty 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hiranya Kumar Sahoo Vs Amrut Ruturaj, I.A.S.

Kori Sethi Vs State of Odisha

Chandramani Pradhan Vs State of Odisha

Diptansu Bhusan Pati Vs State of Odisha

Hrudananda Mahanta Vs Brundaban Satpathy, Director, Elementary Education, Odisha

Bibhasini Das Vs State of Odisha