Gobind Agarwalla Vs State of Odisha

Mr. Lalit Kumar Maharana, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that during the proceedings before the Internal Complaint Committee (ICC), he had raised objections that the petitioner had never been supplied with the copies of the complaint and statements of the witnesses, and letter No-FW-CIACBBSR/07/2007 (PART-11)/U.O.I316 dated 30.11.201 so as to enable him to prepare proper defence. Instead of providing the required documents as sought for, the proceedings were concluded via virtual mode, and the petitioner’s statement was recorded virtually on 09.06.2021. Mr. Maharana, learned counsel for the petitioner urged that though no opportunity of personal hearing was

¶17

Page 1 of 3

¶18

afforded to the petitioner, yet the Managing Director & Disciplinary Authority of OPTCL passed the order dated 06.12.2021 vide Annexure-1.

¶19

The petitioner, challenging the said order, has approached the Appellate Authority under Rule 11 of Sexual Harassment of Women At Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal), Rules, 2013.

¶20

Mr. Maharana, learned counsel for the petitioner, referring to Annexure-8 at page 173 of the record, submitted that the endorsement shows that appeal was filed before the Appellate Authority on 28.02.2022. He further submitted that since the appeal was not taken up, finding no alternative, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.

¶21

4.1. Mr. Maharana, learned counsel for the petitioner, has referred to page-78 of the writ petition to show that, before approaching this Court in this writ petition, the petitioner had filed a representation before the Chairman, OPTCL, Appellate Authority on 23.05.2022, which has been stated to have been received by Deputy Secretary.

¶22

Mr. Arnav Behera, learned counsel for the OPTCL submitted that upon direction, the Appellate Authority may take up the appeal and dispose of in accordance with law.

¶23

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, as the appeal is stated to be pending, it is deemed proper Page 2 of 3

¶24

to direct the Appellate Forum to take steps to fix a date for hearing of the appeal and intimate the petitioner within a period of ten days hence. The Appellate Authority shall afford the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. Considering the grievance of the petitioner with regard to non-supply of documents and each of the grounds taken in the appeal, the Appellate Form shall pass appropriate order, which shall be communicated to the petitioner forthwith.

¶25

It is hoped that the Appellate Forum will make endeavour to dispose of the appeal within a period of six weeks from today. 8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶26

Aswini

¶27

Signature Not Verified

¶28

Digitally Signed Signed by: ASWINI KUMAR SETHY Designation: Personal Assistant (Secretary-in-charge) Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTA CK Date: 22-Aug-2024 19:34:34

¶29

Page 3 of 3

Gobind Agarwalla v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gobind Agarwalla v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sayed Rahemat Alli Vs State of Odisha

Pabitra Matia Vs State of Odisha

Laxmi N.Tripathy Vs Renubala Mohapatra

Pratik Srichandan Vs State of Odisha

Santanu Kumar Bebarta Vs Kishore Kumar Samantaray

Kirtan Behera Vs Member, Board of Revenue, Orissa