Disposed¶22

Sidhanta Subrat Patra v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC10 Apr 2025WP(C)/5014/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Compassionate appointment; Rehabilitation Assistance Rules, 1990; O.C.S. (RA) Rules, 1990; death in harness; Forest Guard; legal heirs; pending application dated 18.12.2012; Divisional Forest Officer, Karanjia; State of Odisha; mandamus; direction to consider claim and pass speaking and reasoned order; two-month timeline; notification dated 4th April, 2025; writ disposed of; High Court of Orissa; W.P.(C); single judge.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Opposite Party No. 2 to consider the petitioner's case under the O.C.S. (RA) Rules, 1990 by passing a speaking and reasoned order within two months from communication of a certified copy of the order, with the final order to be communicated to the petitioner within ten days thereafter; urgent certified copy of the order to be issued as per Rules. ¶22

Sidhanta Subrat Patra Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of mandamus should issue directing the opposite parties, particularly Opposite Party No. 2 (Divisional Forest Officer, Karanjia), to consider the petitioner's application under the Rehabilitation Assistance Rules, 1990 and issue an order of appointment in favour of the petitioner taking into consideration his qualification, with consequential service and financial benefits.

¶16

Court's answer

Taking into account the submissions, the factual background, the date of death, the application submitted by the petitioner and the notification dated 4th April, 2025, the writ application was disposed of by directing Opposite Party No. 2 to consider the petitioner's case under the O.C.S. (RA) Rules, 1990 and pass a speaking and reasoned order within two months from the date of communication of a certified copy of the order; the final order so passed was to be communicated to the petitioner within ten days thereafter.

¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Orissa at Cuttack (A.K. Mohapatra, J.), WP(C) No.5014 of 2025, decided 10.04.2025: Writ petition filed by Sidhanta Subrat Patra, a legal heir of late Rushinath Patra, a Forest Guard who died in harness on 13.02.2011, seeking mandamus to direct Opposite Party No. 2, Divisional Forest Officer, Karanjia, to consider his pending application dated 18.12.2012 under the Rehabilitation Assistance Rules, 1990 for appointment with consequential benefits. The Court, also keeping in view a notification dated 4th April, 2025, disposed of the writ application by directing Opposite Party No. 2 to consider the petitioner's case under the O.C.S. (RA) Rules, 1990 and pass a speaking and reasoned order within two months of communication of a certified copy of the order, the final order to be communicated to the petitioner within ten days thereafter.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.5014 of 2025

¶2

Sidhanta Subrat Patra ..... Petitioner

¶3

Represented By Adv. - Saroja Kanta Samal

¶4

-versus-

¶5

1) State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Parties

¶6

Divisional Forest Officer, Karanjia

¶7

Represented By Adv. – Mr. D.K.Sahoo, A.G.A.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

10.04.2025

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

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. Perused the writ application as well as documents annexed thereto.

¶15

The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the following prayer:

¶16

“Under above the circumstances it is humbly prayed therefore that the Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ/writs by directing the opp.parties , more particularly the Opp. Party No. 2 , to consider the application of the petitioner under Rehabilitation Assistance Rules, 1990 and upon consideration issue order of appointment in favour of the petitioner under

¶17

Page 1 of 3.

¶18

Rehabilitation Assistance Rule taking into consideration his qualification. And further be pleased to direct the opp. Parties to give all consequential service and financial benefits.”

¶19

It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the father of the petitioner namely late Rushinath Patra, died in harness on 13.02.2011 while he was working as Forest Guard leaving behind his legal heirs including the present petitioner. The petitioner submitted an application on 18.12.2012 which is stated to be pending for consideration. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that although his application was submitted a long time ago the same is still pending for consideration, and as such, the family of the deceased government servant is facing immense hardships.

¶20

Taking into consideration the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the petitioner, further keeping in view the factual background of the present case as well as the date of death and the application submitted by the petitioner and keeping in view the notification dated 4^th April, 2025 the present writ application is being disposed of by directing the opposite party No.2 to consider the case of the petitioner under the O.C.S. (RA) Rules, 1990 by passing a speaking and reasoned order within a period of two months from the date of communication of a certified copy of today’s order. The final order so passed be communicated to the petitioner within ten days thereafter.

¶21

Page 2 of 3.

¶22