Pravakar Digal Vs State of Odisha

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

¶16

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

¶17

“It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that this

¶18

Hon'ble Court may be graciously pleased to admit this Writ application and direct the Opp. Parties to give appointment to the Petitioner under Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme, as per the Odisha Civil Service (Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules, 1990, within a stipulated time period, by setting aside the order no. 3559/BBE, dtd. 25.07.2024, at Annexure 1 to the writ application in the interest of justice;

¶19

And any other writ/order/direction/relief may be

¶20

Page 1 of 4.

¶21

passed as deemed fit and proper;”

¶22

It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that earlier the petitioner had approached this Court in W.P.(C) No.6569 of 2024 claiming appointment under the Rehabilitation Assistance Rules, 1990 on the ground of the death of his father, who was a govt. employee during his lifetime and died in harness. The said writ application was disposed of vide order dated 27.03.2024 with a direction to the Opposite Party No.3 i.e. Additional District Magistrate, Kandhamal to consider the application of the petitioner in a manner as has been specifically laid down in para-8 of the said order. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that prior to the above noted writ application, the Petitioner had also approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.36726 of 2023 which was disposed of vide order dated 15.11.2023 with a direction to the Opposite Parties to consider the case of the Petitioner in the light of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Malaya Nanda Sethy vrs. State of Orissa and others : reported in 2022(II) OLR(SC)-1 and State of West Bengal-v.-Debabrata Tiwri passed in Civil Appeal No.8842 of 2022 decided on 3^rd of March, 2023 reported in (2023 (3) SCALE-557 decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. In the said writ application, this Court had also directed the Opposite Parties to consider the case of the Petitioner keeping in view the law laid down by this Court in Suchitra Bal vs. State of Odisha & ors. in W.P.(C) No.2081 of 2021 decided on 16.03.2023 as well as Bindusagar Samantaray vs. State of Odisha & ors. in W.A. No.810 of 2021 decided on 25.09.2023 within a stipulated period of time. Since the case of the Petitioner was not considered in its proper prospective, the Petitioner was compelled to approached this Court for the second time in the above noted writ

¶23

Page 2 of 4.

¶24

application.

¶25

After disposal of the 2^nd writ application bearing W.P.(C) No.6569 of 2024, the Petitioner approached the Opposite Party No.2 for a fresh decision on his pending application for appointment on compassionate ground. Learned counsel for the Petitioner drawing attention of this Court to letter dated 25.07.2024 under Annexure-1 submitted that although all the documents have been submitted before the Opposite Party No.2, however, the Opposite Party No.2 has written a letter to the Petitioner directing to furnish a copy of the family settlement deed for consideration. He further contended that the family settlement deed has already been filed by the Petitioner. However, no final decision has been taken by the Opposite Party No.2 pursuant to the order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.6569 of 2024 dated 27.03.2024. Being aggrieved by such inaction of the Opposite Parties to consider the case of the Petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground which is pending since 2013, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing a present writ application.

¶26

Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that she has no instruction in the matter. Further, referring to the letter under Annexure-1 dated 25.07.2024, learned counsel for the State submitted that the Petitioner was asked by the Opposite Party No.2 to furnish a copy of the family settlement deed showing the fact that the Petitioner has separated from other family members before the Opposite Party No.2 for consideration of his case for appointment under OCS (RA) Rules, 1990. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the State submitted that in the event the Petitioner has submitted the family settlement deed as has been requested vide letter

¶27

Page 3 of 4.

¶28

dated 25.07.2024 and no final decision has been taken pursuant to order dated 27.03.2024 passed in W.P.(C) No.6569 of 2024, she will have no objection in the event this Court directs the Opposite Party No.2 to consider and dispose of the matter in accordance with law and in terms of order dated 27.03.2024.

¶29

On a careful examination of the materials on record, further considering the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the parties, and keeping in view the limited nature of the grievance involved in the present writ application, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ application at the stage of admission with a direction to the Opposite Party No.2 to consider and dispose of the representation of the Petitioner strictly in terms of the order dated 27.03.2024 passed in W.P.(C) No.6569 of 2024 within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of a certified copy of today’s order by the petitioner. Any final decision so taken by the Opposite Party No.2 be also communicated to the Petitioner within two weeks from the date of taking such a decision.

¶30

With the aforesaid observation, the writ application stands disposed of.

¶31

Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.

¶32

( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge

¶33

Anil

¶34

Signature Not Verified Page 4 of 4. Digitally Signed Signed by: ANIL KUMAR SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 04-Feb-2025 16:33:01

Pravakar Digal v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pravakar Digal 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Susil Mallick @ Sushila Mallick Vs State of Odisha

Subhadra Chhatria Vs State of Odisha

Sumitra Panna Vs State of Odisha

Jagannath Panda @ Jagannatha Panda Vs State of Odisha

Ananda Prasad Acharaya Vs State of Orissa

Nityananda Naik Vs State of Odisha