Disposed¶24

S.Keerthi Kumar v. Union of India

Orissa HC20 Mar 2025WP(C)/6963/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Orissa High Court disposes of W.P.(C) No.6963 of 2025 as withdrawn; holds that two separate CAT Cuttack Bench orders dated 19.02.2025 (O.A. No.260/00594 of 2018 and O.A. No.260/00567 of 2018) cannot be challenged in one writ petition; liberty granted to file fresh writ petitions; petitioners S. Keerthi Kumar, Ajay Singh Sinsinwar, Namita Barik vs Union of India and others; no statute or precedent cited.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of as withdrawn, with liberty to the petitioners to file fresh writ petitions challenging Annexures-1 and 2 separately. ¶24

S.Keerthi Kumar Vs Union of India — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.6963 of 2025

¶2

1. S. Keerthi Kumar

¶3

2. Ajay Singh Sinsinwar

¶4

3. Namita Barik

¶5

….. Petitioners

¶6

Mr. Ashok Kumar Panigrahi, Advocate

¶7

-versus-

¶8

Union of India and others

¶9

..... Opp. Parties

¶10

Mr. P.K. Parhi, D.S.G.I. along

¶11

with Mr. D. Gochhayat, Central Govt. Counsel

¶12

CORAM:

¶13

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

¶14

THE HON'BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO

ORDER

Order No.

20.03.2025

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

¶19

Heard Mr. Ashok Kumar Panigrahi, learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶20

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners S. Keerthi Kumar, Ajay Singh Sinsinwar and Namita Barik challenging the order dated 19.02.2025 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack under Annexures-1 and 2.

¶21

Page 1 of 2

¶22

From Annexure-1, it appears that petitioner no.1, S. Keerthi Kumar and petitioner no.2, Ajay Singh Sinsinwar along with one Rojalin Gaan were the applicants in O.A. No.260/00594 of 2018 in which judgment was pronounced on 19.02.2025. Needless to say that petitioner no.3 Namita Barik is not one of the applicants in O.A. No.260/00594 of 2018. So far as petitioner no.3 Namita Barik is concerned, she is the sole applicant in O.A. No.260/00567 of 2018 which was also disposed of on 19.02.2025 by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack. Annexure-1 and Annexure-2 are two separate orders. Therefore, both could not have been challenged in one writ petition.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission of the Court to withdraw this writ petition with liberty to challenge Annexures-1 and 2 separately in two writ petitions.

¶24

In view of such submission, the writ petition stands disposed of as withdrawn giving liberty to the petitioners to file fresh writ petitions.

¶25

( S.K. Sahoo)

¶26

Judge

¶27

(Savitri Ratho)

¶28

Signature Not Verified

¶29

Judge