Daitari Barik vs State Of Odisha And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 2660 Ori

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                 W.P.(C) No. 9662 of 2023

            Daitari Barik                                ....                  Petitioner
                                                        Mr. Asutosh Sahoo, Advocate
                                            -versus-
            State of Odisha and others                   ....        Opposite Parties
                                                              Mr. Tarun Pattnaik, ASC

                       CORAM:
                       JUSTICE A.K.MOHAPATRA

                                      ORDER

Order No.                           03.04.2023
   01.      1.      This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement
            (Virtual/Physical Mode).

2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Opposite Parties.

3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ petition with the following prayer:-

"It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit the application, issue notice to the opposite parties and after hearing the parties may be pleased to direct the opposite parties to count his past service rendered in the Job Contract Establishment along with the service rendered by him in the Regular Establishment for the purpose of pension and pensionary benefits and grant consequential benefits along with interest thereon in favour of the petitioner within a stipulated time and may be pleased to pass such order(s) as it may deem fit and proper."

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner wants to make a fresh representation before the authority concerned with a direction from this Court to the authority to consider the case of the Petitioner within a stipulated period of time.

// 2 //

5. Learned counsel for the State-Opposite Parties submits that he has no objection if the Petitioner is permitted to file a fresh representation before the authority concerned with a direction to the authority concerned to consider the representation of the Petitioner in accordance with law within the stipulated period of time.

6. Considering such submissions and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, this Court disposes of the writ petition permitting the Petitioner to make a fresh representation before the Opposite Party No.1 within a period of two weeks from today and in the event such representation is filed before the Opposite Party No.1, the Opposite Party No.1 shall do well to consider and dispose of the same taking into consideration the judgment passed by the Odisha Administrative Tribunal in the case of Nityananda Biswal v. State of Orissa and others (O.A. No.3020(C) of 2003, decided on 04.01.2004) as well as the orders passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court in the cases of Biswanath Rana v. State of Odisha & others (WPC(OAC) No.4182 of 2014, decided on 17.02.2022) and Mahadeb Panda v. State of Odisha & Ors. (W.P.(C) No.27051 of 2022, decided on 18.10.2022) and any other order/judgment to be relied upon by the Petitioner to be filed along with a copy of this order, by passing a speaking and reasoned order within a period of two months from the date of filing of such representation. The decision so taken on such representation shall be communicated to the Petitioner within two weeks thereafter.

(A.K. Mohapatra) Judge Debasis