Kishore Chandra Dalai vs State Of Odisha And Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 11783 Ori

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                   WPC No. 30316 of 2020

             Kishore Chandra Dalai                  ....                  Petitioner
                                                     Mr. P.K. Samantaray, Advocate
                                                 -Versus -
             State of Odisha and others              ....                Opposite Parties

                                                                          State Counsel


                          CORAM:
                           DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI

ORDER_ 16.11.2021

Order No. This matter is taken up by hybrid mode.

2. Heard Mr. P.K. Samantaray, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Addl. Standing Counsel appearing for the State.

3. Mr. P.K. Samantaray, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that this matter is covered by the judgment of this Court in Manas Kumar Swain v. State of Orissa and others, 2020 (I) ILR- CUT-357.

4. Learned Addl. Standing Counsel contended that the order impugned is appealable one, but in view of the judgment of this Court in Manas Kumar Swain (supra), which is applicable to the petitioner, the writ petition can be decided by this Court.

5. In view of such contention, this Court perused the judgment of this Court in Manas Kumar Swain (supra), where in pargraph-17, the following observation has been made.

"17. By 73rd amendment of the Constitution 1992, Part-IX has been inserted to the Constitution by inserting Article 243 to 243(o). To achieve the objective of such amendment of

provisions of the Constitution and strengthening the peoples participation in panchayat administration, if the benefit has been extended to the petitioner in consonance with the constitutional mandate read with MGNREG Act, 2005 and operational guidelines issued under the provisions of the Act itself and basing upon which the petitioner was engaged and allowed to continue by virtue of the agreement executed between the parties, during subsistence of such agreement, the authority cannot curtail the same without any rhyme or reason by relieving him forthwith. Thereby, the entire action of opposite party no.4 by issuing order in Annexure-4 relieving the petitioner from the post of GRS cannot sustain in the eye of law and accordingly the same is liable to be quashed and is hereby quashed. The opposite parties are directed to allow the petitioner to continue in his post as GRS, as before, till subsistence of the agreement between the parties and allow him to discharge the duty allotted to him, in consonance with the provisions of law."

6. In view of such position, since this writ petition is covered by the judgment of this Court in Manas Kumar Swain (supra), this writ petition is disposed of in terms of the said judgment.

7. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed.

(Dr. B.R. Sarangi) Judge Alok