Petitioner sought restoration of P.D.S. benefits and voting rights. Contention was accepted by the Petitioner's counsel that he remains an active voter and benefits are being considered. Petition disposed without further orders.
The Writ Petition was disposed of without any direction granted as the Petitioner's counsel did not dispute the Counter Affidavit.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.23140 of 2016
Kalipada Biswas …. Petitioner
Mr. S. Bahadur, Advocate
-versus-
Union of India & others …. Opposite Parties
Mr. T. Pattanaik Additional Standing Counsel
CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA
Order No.
ORDER
07.02.2024
07.
This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Learned Counsel for the Parties are present.
3. This Writ Petition has been preferred by the Petitioner seeking direction to the Opposite Parties to restore the P.D.S. benefits in his favour, stopped by the authority concerned so also to restore his voting right.
4. A Counter Affidavit has been filed on behalf of Opposite Party Nos.4 & 5 indicating therein that the Petitioner is still an active voter in the constituency 100 AC Mahakalapada and his voting rights were not taken away. So far as the issuance of new ration card is concerned, it has further been indicated in the Counter that the case of the Petitioner shall be considered as per merit, subject to availability of option on website. Hence, the assumption of the Petitioner that benefits have been denied to him by the State is erroneous. A communication dated 04.01.2024
made by the Block Development Officer, Mahakalpada addressed to the Tahasildar, Mahakalapada and the downloaded copy of updated EPIC data from voter helpline site of Election Commission of India, as at Annexure-A/5 & B/5 respectively, have been appended to the said Counter Affidavit to substantiate the pleadings made in paragraphs7 & 8 of the Counter Affidavit.
5. The said averments made in the Counter Affidavit are not disputed by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner.
6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.
Prasant
(S. K. Mishra)
Judge
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed Signed by: PRASANT KUMAR PRADHAN Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack. Date: 08-Feb-2024 11:23:18
Page 2 of 2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Petitioner, an active voter, was entitled to P.D.S. benefits and voting rights after their cessation.
Whether the respondent authorities had denied P.D.S. benefits and voting rights to the Petitioner.
Kalipada Biswas
Union of India
Sanjay Kumar Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
