Minatibala Prusty Vs Union of India

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SIPUN BEHERA Designation: Senior StenographerReason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACKDate: 21-Mar-2025 19:42:27

¶16

5. The Senior Administrative Officer, All India Institute of Medical Science (AIIMS), Bhubaneswar

¶17

6. The Administrative Officer, All India Institute of Medical Science (AIIMS), Bhubaneswar

¶18

Page 1 of 4

¶19

7. The Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack

¶20

..... Opp. Parties

¶21

Mr. Rajesh Kumar Mahapatra, Senior Panel Counsel, Union of India for opp. party nos.1 to 3

¶22

CORAM:

¶23

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO

¶24

THE HON'BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO

ORDER

Order No.

01.

20.03.2025

This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode).

¶30

Heard Mr. Samir Kumar Mishra, learned Senior Advocate being assisted by Mr. S.K. Mandal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Rajesh Kumar Mahapatra, learned Senior Panel Counsel, Union of India appearing for opp. party nos.1 to 3.

¶31

The petitioner, Minatibala Prusty has filed this writ petition challenging the order dated 09.01.2025 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack (in short, „Tribunal‟) in O.A. No.260/00627 of 2024 in which the prayer for interim stay of the termination order dated 24.10.2024 was rejected.

¶32

The operative portion of the impugned order/termination order is reproduced below for ready reference:

¶33

Page 2 of 4

¶34

“ 12. In view of the facts and law discussed above, we are not inclined to grant any interim direction as prayed for by the applicant in this OA. Hence, the interim prayer is hereby rejected.

¶35

13. Since counter has already been filed, applicant is allowed four weeks time to file rejoinder, if any, after serving copy on the other side. List this matter on 10.02.2025 for hearing .”

¶36

In view of what has been stated in paragraph no.13, when we put a pertinent question to the parties as to what has happened on 10.02.2025, Mr. Mishra, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner submitted that rejoinder affidavit has already been filed and he has got instruction that the matter has been transferred to the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi. However, Mr. Mahapatra, learned Senior Panel Counsel appearing for opp. party nos.1 to 3 as per the order uploaded in the learned Tribunal‟s website submitted that the matter was part heard on 10.02.2025 and then it was adjourned to 17.03.2025 and now it is posted to 28.03.2025.

¶37

Mr. Mishra, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner submitted that since pleadings are complete, in the interest of justice, appropriate direction may be issued to the learned Tribunal to expedite the hearing of the original application.

¶38

Page 3 of 4

¶39

Mr. Mahapatra, learned Senior Panel Counsel appearing for opp. party nos.1 to 3 submitted that he has no objection for early disposal of the original application.

¶40

In view of such submission made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, while not interfering with the impugned order dated 09.01.2025 passed in O.A. No.260/00627 of 2024, we direct the learned Tribunal to expedite the hearing of the aforesaid O.A. and conclude the same expeditiously, preferably, by the end of April, 2025.

¶41

With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶42

Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules.

¶43

( S.K. Sahoo)

¶44

Judge

¶45

(Savitri Ratho) Judge

¶46

Sipun