Keshaba Putel vs State Of Odisha And Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 8842 Ori

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                             W.P.(C) No.24985 of 2021

Keshaba Putel                                   .....                   Petitioner
                                                         Mr. K. Swain, Advocate
                                             Vs.
State of Odisha and others                     .....               Opposite parties

                                                        Standing Counsel S&ME
                CORAM:
                   DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI

                                             ORDER

25.08.2021 Order No. The matter is taken up by hybrid mode.

2. Heard Mr. K. Swain, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. Mohanty, learned Standing Counsel for School and Mass Education Department.

3. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking direction to the opposite parties to treat the petitioner to be absorbed as Sikhya Sahayaks with effect from 15.04.2008 since the petitioner is engaged in the vacant post of Sikhya Sahayaks and is having same qualification as that of the Sikhya Sahayak and is performing the same duty in a primary school as per the policy decision of the State Government and accordingly treat the petitioner as Jr. Teacher w.e.f. 15.04.2011 and Regular Primary School Teacher w.e.f. 15.04.2014 in terms of the resolution dated 16.02.2008 of the Government.

4. In course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that highlighting the grievance, the petitioner has made representation to opposite party no.1 vide Annexure-10 and the same may be directed to be disposed of within a stipulated time in the light of the judgment of this Court in the case of Dhananjaya Charan Dey v. State of Orissa, 2020 (II) ILR CUT 84, to which

learned Standing Counsel for School and Mass Education Department has raised no objection.

5. In view of the aforesaid limited grievance of the petitioner, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court disposes of the writ petition directing opposite party no.1 to consider and dispose of the representation of the petitioner in Annexure-10 in the light of the judgment of this Court in the case of Dhananjaya Charan Dey mentioned supra, and pass appropriate order in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of production of authenticated/certified copy this order.

Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.

Ashok (DR. B.R. SARANGI, J.)