Taramani Surin Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Taramani Surin Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to the petitioner to give an appropriate representation to OP No.2 at the earliest; OP No.2 to take a call on it and inform the petitioner of the result in writing within an outer limit of three (3) weeks; opposite parties free to solicit information/documents without brooking delay; all contentions kept open; no costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, whose suspension was revoked while she faces a disciplinary inquiry, ought to have been reinstated in the very same office/school (or accommodated in one of three nearby schools having vacancies) instead of being posted to a faraway place, her two children studying in the same institution. +1 more

Court's answer

This writ petition is disposed of, reserving liberty to the petitioner to give an appropriate representation to OP No.2 at the earliest.

Ratio / Principle

If such a representation is given, OP No.2 shall take a call on it and inform the petitioner of the result of consideration in writing within an outer limit of three (3) weeks.

Key takeaways

All contentions of the parties are kept open.ratio¶18
It is open to the answering opposite parties to solicit any information or documents from the petitioner as required for taking a decision on the subject representation, but delay shall not be brooked on that guise.ratio¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Orissa at Cuttack (Dixit Krishna Shripad, J.), Order dated 04.09.2025 in W.P.(C) No.17051 of 2025 (Taramani Surin v. State of Odisha and Others): The petitioner, whose suspension had been revoked and who remains under disciplinary inquiry, complained of being posted to a faraway place while her two children study in the very same institution, seeking reinstatement in the same office/school or accommodation in one of three nearby schools having vacancies. Learned AGA contended that revocation of suspension creates no duty to restore the same position and place, but agreed to have the official respondents look into her grievance upon a representation. The court disposed of the writ petition reserving liberty to the petitioner to make an appropriate representation to OP No.2, directed OP No.2 to decide it and communicate the result in writing within an outer limit of three weeks, permitted the opposite parties to call for information/documents without brooking delay, and kept all contentions open. No costs.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C) No.17051 of 2025

Taramani Surin

…. Petitioner

Mr. L. Mohanty, Advocate

-Versus-

State of Odisha and Others

…. Opposite Parties

Mr. U.C. Behura, AGA

CORAM:

JUSTICE DIXIT KRISHNA SHRIPAD

Order No. 06.

ORDER 04.09.2025

The short grievance of the petitioner, who has secured revocation of her suspension, is as to she being posted to a faraway place, when two children of her are studying in the very same institution. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that suspension order having been revoked, his client ought to have been reinstated in the very same office/school, and that there is no reason or rhyme for pushing her too far to the prejudice of her children, who require her oversee as a parent. He also tells that there are three schools nearby and in one of their vacancies petitioner can be accommodated.

Learned AGA opposes the petition contending that merely because suspension has been revoked, there is no duty on the part of the official to restore the same position and place to the petitioner, who is facing the disciplinary inquiry. Having so contended, now, he agrees to instruct his official clients to look into the grievance of the petitioner, if a representation is given by

Page 1 of 2

the petitioner for the redressal of her grievance. This assurance satisfies counsel for the petitioner.

In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed off reserving liberty to the petitioner to give an appropriate representation to OP No.2 at the earliest and if one is given, the OP No.2 shall take a call on that and inform result of consideration to the petitioner in writing within an outer limit of three (3) weeks. All contentions are kept open.

It is open to the answering opposite parties to solicit any information or documents from the side of the petitioner, as required for taking a decision on the subject representation. However, in that guise delay shall not be brooked.

Now, no costs.

Web Copy of this order be acted upon by all concerned.

( Dixit Krishna Shripad ) Judge

Anisha

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed Signed by: ANISHA NANDA Designation: Jr. Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 04-Sep-2025 18:19:39

Page 2 of 2