Disposed

Manasi Dash v. Union of India

Orissa HC6 Aug 2024WP(C)/18365/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single judge disposed of an instant writ petition filed by a petitioner seeking immediate consideration of a midterm transfer request for her son's admission in Class-VIII. The court directed the concerned Kendriya Vidyalaya society to examine the representation and take a decision within ten days.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of with a direction to opposite party No.4 to consider the representation in Annexure-2 and take a decision immediately, preferably within ten days.

Manasi Dash Vs Union of India — Education and Admissions | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN T H E HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTT A CK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.18365 of 2024

¶3

Manasi Dash

¶4

…. Petitioner Mr. S.K. Brah m a, Advocate

¶5

-Versus-

¶6

Union of Indi a and others

¶7

…. O pposite party Mr. H.Tripathy, Adv o cate for KVS

¶8

C O RAM: MR. J USTICER.K. PATTANAIK

ORDER

Order No.

06.08.2024

(This matter is taken up through virtual mode)

¶14

Hear d learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Naik, learned counsel for o pposite party Nos.1 and 3 and Mr. Tri p athy, learned counsel for o p posite party No.2, 4 and 5.

¶15

Insta n t writ petition is filed by the petitioner f or a direction to the opposite parties and particularly, opposite part y No.2, 4 and 5 to conside r the midterm transfer and admission o f her son in Class-VIII in K endriya Vidyalaya on the grounds stated therein.

¶16

Lear n ed counsel for the petitioner submits tha t this Court in a similar case, disposed of the matter vide A n nexure-5 for consideration of the grievance of the petitioner therei n .

¶17

Refe r ring to Annexures-3 and 4 and clai m ing that the representatio n as at Annexure-2 series is pending before opposite party No.4, l earned counsel for the petitioner woul d submit that the same is r e quired to be immediately attended to f ollowed by a decision.

¶18

Page 1 of 2

¶19

Reco r ded the submission of Mr. Naik, learn e d counsel for opposite par t y Nos. 1 and 3 (Union of India) and Mr. Tripathy, learned coun s el for opposite party Nos.2, 4 and 5 an d both do not have any ob j ection, if in case,the representation i. e . Annexure-2 series pendin g before opposite party No.4 is examined as per law.

¶20

Cons i dering the above facts and submissio n s of learned counsel for t h e respective parties, this Court is of the v iew that such a request fo r admission on account of the midter m transfer so revealed fro m Annexure-2 seriesshould be examine d by opposite party No.4 w ithout delay and within a stipulated peri o d.

¶21

7. Acco r dingly, it is ordered.

¶22

In the result, the writ petition stands dispo s ed of with a direction to o pposite party No.4 to consider Anne x ure-2 and to take a decisi o n immediately on such request followed by a decision at the earlies t preferably within a period of ten days f rom the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶23

Urge n t copy of this order be issued as per rule s

¶24

TUDU

¶25

Signature Not Verified

¶26

Digitally Signed Signed by: THAKURDAS TUDU Reason: Authentication Location: OHC,CTC Date: 07-Aug-2024 12:55:29

¶27

Page 2 of 2

Manasi Dash v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manasi Dash v. Union of India

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

Samir Kumar Behera Vs State of Odisha

Sonali Pattanayak Vs State of Odisha

Jagannath Madangi Vs State of Odisha

Biswajeet Behera @ Mohapatra Vs the Secy. Bse, Odisha

Lipsa Prusty Vs Santosh Kumar Sahoo

Sonali Panda Vs State of Odisha