Writ petition challenging an order directing the petitioner to submit a fresh application for rehabilitation. High Court directed respondents to reconsider the case within three months applying settled judicial principles.
Petitioner for reconsideration of rehabilitation appointment case within three months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed Signed by: MANAS KUMAR PANDA Reason: Authentication Location: OHC, Cuttack Date: 18-Dec-2024 18:15:12
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.16949 of 2020
Rudra Narayan Singh …. Petitioner
Mr. Arjuna Chandra Behera, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha, represented through its Principal Secretary, General Administration and Public Grievance Department and Other
…. Opposite Parties
Mr. G. Tripathy, Additional Government Advocate
CORAM: SHRI JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY ORDER
18.12.2024
Order No.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed Signed by: MANAS KUMAR PANDA Reason: Authentication Location: OHC, Cuttack Date: 18-Dec-2024 18:15:12
D post vide impugned order dated 29th May, 2020 under Annexure-3. This is the subject matter of challenge in the present writ petition.
M.K. Panda
Page 2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the respondent authorities are directed to reconsider the petitioner's case for rehabilitation appointment in light of the settled principles under the Rehabilitation Assistance Rules.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Malaya Nanda Sethy vs. State of Orissa and othersRelied on¶21
Malaya Nanda Sethy vs. State of Orissa and others, 2022 (II) OLR (SC) – 1
Rudra Narayan Singh
State of Odisha
B. P. Routray
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
