Disposed

Balakrushna Parida v. Food Corporation of India, New Delhi

Orissa HC13 Mar 2024WP(C)/5280/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed for promotion based on representation. Court disposed of the matter in admiram, directing the respondent to consider the representation within two months and communicate the decision within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation for promotion within two months and communicate the decision within two weeks.

Balakrushna Parida Vs Food Corporation of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.5280 of 2024

¶3

Balakrushna Parida

¶4

…. Petitioner

¶5

Mr. Brundaban Rout, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

Food Corporation of India, New Delhi and others

¶8

…. Opp. Parties

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

13.03.2024

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

¶16

Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner.

¶17

The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner with the

¶18

following prayers:-

¶19

“It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit the writ application and further pleased to issue writ of Mandamus/Certiorari directing to the opp. parties to consider the representation under Annexure-5 series of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Mandal from the Handling Labour basing upon the existing vacancy against the Food Storage Depot Bhubaneswar and its seniority list.

¶20

And such other order/orders, writ/writs be passed granting complete relief in favour of the petitioner.”

¶21

It is submitted by learned counsel for the Petitioner that although

¶22

the Petitioner has filed representation under Annexure-5 before the Opposite Party No.2, but the same is still pending before the said

¶23

// 2 //

¶24

Opposite Party and the said Opposite Party has not taken any decision as of now.

¶25

Learned counsel for the State submits that he has no objection, if a direction is given to the authority concerned to consider the representation of the Petitioner in accordance with law within a stipulated period of time.

¶26

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court disposes of the writ petition at the stage of admission with a direction to the Opposite Party No.2 to consider the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-5 in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. It is needless to mention here that the representation of the Petitioner shall be considered and disposed of by passing a speaking and reasoned order. Any decision so taken on the said representation shall be communicated to the Petitioner within a period of two weeks thereafter.

¶27

( A.K. Mohapatra) Judge

¶28

Debasis

¶29

Signature Not Verified

¶30

Digitally Signed Signed by: DEBASIS AECH Reason: Authentication Location: OHC, CUTTACK. Date: 17-Mar-2024 18:41:03

Balakrushna Parida v. Food Corporation of India, New Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balakrushna Parida v. Food Corporation of India, New Delhi

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

Ramesh Chandra Swain Vs State of Odisha

A. Dillip Kumar Reddy Vs State of Odisha

Kailash Chandra Behera Vs State of Odisha

Braja Kishore Sahoo Vs Chief Commnr. Gst, Cx and Customs, Bbsr

Akshaya Kumar Pradhan Vs State of Odisha

Rabindra Padhiary Vs Food Corporation of India, New Delhi