Sasmita Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Mr. Sangram Das, learned Standing Counsel, Vigilance produced the instruction provided by the Superintendent of Police, Vigilance, Bhubaneswar Division, Bhubaneswar in Court. The same be kept in record.

¶13

Basing on the instruction so provided, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Vigilance Department contended that in Bhubaneswar Vigilance P.S. Case No. 33 dtd.24.11.2023, the name of the accused is Sasmita Rani Sahoo, w/o- Sri Jayanta Kumar Beura of Radhakrishna Nagar, Balighat, PS- Sadar, Dist- Puri and she was earlier working as Junior Engineer, Pipili Block, Puri. It is also contended that the aforesaid fact is reflected in order dtd.30.11.2023 so available under Annexure-9.

¶14

Heard Mr. S.K. Rath, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner, Mr. C.K. Pradhan, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate appearing for the

¶15

Page 1 of 3.

¶16

State-Opp. Party and Mr. S. Das, learned Standing Counsel appearing for Opp. Party No. 2.

¶17

The present writ petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer:-

¶18

“The Petitioner, most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to

¶19

i. Admit the writ application, call for the records.

¶20

ii. Issue Rule NISI calling upon the Opposite Parties to show cause as to why the impugned promotion list dated 09.06.2025 at Annexure-7, shall not be declared as illegal with respect to petitioner and private opp. parties being contrary to law and as to why the same shall not be re-casted/modified placing the petitioner above the private Opp. Party No.4.

¶21

AND

¶22

iii. If the Opposite Parties fail to show cause or show insufficient cause, the Hon'ble court be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the State Opp. parties to revise the promotion list dated 09.06.2025 at Annexure-7, by placing the petitioner above the private Opp. Party No.4 by reviewing DPC.

¶23

iv. And/or may pass such other writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directors as this Hon'ble Court may think fit and proper for the ends of Justice.

¶24

V. And for this act of kindness the Petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.”

¶25

It is contended that on the ground that Petitioner is involved in Bhubaneswar Vigilance P.S. Case No. 33 dtd.24.11.2023, Petitioner was not extended with the benefit of promotion to the rank of Asst. Engineer while extending such benefit vide the impugned order dtd.09.06.2025 under Annexure-7.

¶26

Page 2 of 3.

¶27

6.1. It is contended that in view of the instruction provided by the learned Standing Counsel, Vigilance, Petitioner since is not an accused in the aforesaid vigilance case, appropriate direction be issued to Opp. Party No. 1 to extend the benefit of promotion to the Petitioner by convening a review DPC.

¶28

Learned Addl. Govt. Advocate taking into account the instruction provided by the learned Standing Counsel for the Vigilance, also contended that this Court can pass appropriate order in considering the grievance of the Petitioner.

¶29

Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties, considering the submissions made and the fact that Petitioner is not an accused in Bhubaneswar Vigilance P.S. Case No. 33 dtd.24.11.2023, this Court directs Opp. Party No. 1 to convene a review DPC of the DPC basing on which benefit of promotion was extended vide Notification dtd.09.06.2025 under Annexure-7 and consider the claim of the Petitioner. This Court directs opp. Party No. 1 to complete the entire exercise by convening the review DPC with extension of the benefit of promotion, if the Petitioner is found otherwise eligible within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of this order and from the date her juniors got the said benefit vide Notification dt.09.06.2025 with all consequential service and financial benefits.

¶30

The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of.

¶31

Signature Not Verified

¶32

Digitally Signed Signed by: SNEHANJALI PARIDA Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 19-Sep-2025 10:19:05 Sneha

¶33

(BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge

¶34

Page 3 of 3.

Sasmita Sahoo v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sasmita Sahoo 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

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sasmita Dash Vs State of Odisha

Lt Colonel Dr Laxmi Dhar Bhuyan Vs Chief Army Staff,South Block,New Delhi

Lokanath Samal Vs State of Odisha

Ramesh Chandra Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Manoj Kumar Palei Vs State of Odisha

Rajanikanta Patel Vs State of Odisha