Gannavarapa Revathi vs State Of Odisha & Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 1287 Ori

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK


                               WPC(OAC) No.1219 of 2018


                 Gannavarapa Revathi                     ....           Petitioner

                                                       Mr. S. Mohanty, Advocate


                                            -versus-

                 State of Odisha & others                ....     Opposite Party
                                                           Mr. S.N.Mohapatra,
                                                    Standing Counsel, SE & ME
                                         CORAM:

                            JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA



                                             ORDER

Order No.                                   14.02.2022
    02.     1.      This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement
            (Virtual/Physical Mode).

2. Heard learned counsel for both the parties.

3. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking direction to the opposite parties to regularize the service of the Petitioner as Jr.S.E.S. with effect from the date of her initial engagement and similar benefit be extended to the Petitioner as has been extended to other Contract Teachers, who were engaged along with the Petitioner and also to compute the period of service rendered by the Petitioner notionally in the Jr.S.E.S cadre and allow the benefit accordingly to the Petitioner within a stipulated period of time.

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner relies on the decision of the // 2 //

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of U.P. Vrs.Arvind Ku.Strivastav : reported in (2015) 1 SCC 347.

5. It is submitted that similar benefit has also been given by the Government vide order issued by the Government of Odisha in School & Mass Education Department No.25057 dated 23rd December, 2021. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner may be permitted to file a representation before the Opposite Party No.1 ventilating her grievance.

6. Learned Standing Counsel for School & Mass Education Department submits that he has no objection if a direction is given to the Opposite Party No.1 to consider the representation of the Petitioner.

7. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for both the parties, the writ application is disposed of with a direction that the Petitioner is permitted to file a representation before the Opposite Party No.1 within a week and in the event the Petitioner files the representation within the aforesaid period, the Opposite Party No.1 shall do well to consider the same in accordance with law within a period of twelve weeks. It is needless to mention here that the Opposite Party No.1 shall consider the case of the Petitioner taking into consideration all the materials placed before him as well as the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court (supra) and further keeping in view that similar benefit has been given to the similarly situated persons. The representation of the Petitioner shall be disposed by the Opposite Party No.1 by a speaking and reasoned order and the decision thereon shall be communicated to the Petitioner within a period of ten days from the date of decision.

8. This Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the // 3 //

case.

9. With the aforesaid observation and direction the writ application stands disposed of.

10. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

RKS                                       ( A.K. Mohapatra )
                                                 Judge