Sunita Swain vs State Of Odisha & Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 7314 Ori

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                               W.P.(C) No. 28024 of 2019

Sunita Swain                             .....                                   Petitioner
                                                                   Ms. A. Nayak, Advocate
                                         Vs.
State of Odisha & Ors.                   .....                             Opposite Parties
                                                                        Mr. G. Rout, ASC

               CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

                                                ORDER

13.12.2022 Order No. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

10.

2. Ms. A. Nayak, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, so also learned Counsel for the State-Opposite Party are present.

3. Though Mr. A. Mohanty, learned Counsel for opposite Party No.2 appeared on 01.12.2022 and made a submission before this Court that the Writ Petition is not maintainable against the Indian Red Cross Society and prayed for some time to file Citations to substantiate the said submission, none appears on behalf of Opposite Party No.2 on repeated calls.

4. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner further files the judgment in case of New Balaji Chemist (M/s) v. Indian Red Cross Society & anr. Reported in I.L.R (2018) M.P. 894 and submits that the Writ Petition is maintainable.

5. On examination of the said judgment, it is found that the single Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court, relying on the judgment of the apex Court in the case of Board of Control for Cricket In India, held that Indian Red Cross Society may not come within the purview of the definition of "State" or other authorities under Article 12 of the Constitution of India but looking to the challenge made in the petition, their action, if discriminatory cause loss to the society, which functions

for the needy persons, makes them amenable to writ jurisdiction in view of the language engrafted under Article 226 of the Constitution of India that said writ can be issued against the "State","authority" or "person". Therefore, it is held that in the facts, the writ petition is maintainable.

6. Admittedly the said Writ Petition was filed in respect of a tender for medical shop referring to the apex Court judgment in case of Board of Control for Cricket (supra).

7. The present Writ Petition is a service matter, vide which a prayer has been made to quash Annexure-9, vide which the representation of the Petitioner was rejected, so also to quash the selection of the Opposite Party No.3 and to direct the Opposite Party No.2 to appoint the Petitioner as Junior Assistant in the said establishment.

8. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner prays for some more time to satisfy this Court that with regard to service matter also Writ Petition is maintainable against the Indian Red Cross Society.

9. Matter be listed in the week commencing from 9th January, 2023 under the heading "Fresh Admission".

(S.K. MISHRA) JUDGE

Banita