Dharanidhar Das vs State Of Odisha And
2023 Latest Caselaw 3172 Ori

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                        W.P.(C) No.11184 of 2023

        Dharanidhar Das                    ....                 Petitioner
                                          Mr. Manoranjan Nayak, Advocate

                                         -versus-
        State of Odisha and
        Others                              ....               Opposite Parties
                                                         Mr. R.N. Mishra, AGA

                           CORAM:
               JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

                                           ORDER

11.04.2023 Order No.

01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. The Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition with the following prayer: -

<The petitioner above named therefore humbly prays that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit the writ application, issue notice to opposite parties for show-cause and after hearing both the sides may be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus/certiorari by directing the opposite parties to take appropriate steps to release the arrear salary of the petitioner from 01.06.1994 to 04.11.2014 keeping in view the judgment passed in the case of Prasanna Kumar Rout Vrs. State of Orissa represented through its Commissioner-cum- Secretary to Govt. S.M.E. Department and others reported in 2008 (Supp.-1) OLR-903 by modifying the order dated 16.09.2014 and 23.03.2015 of the Govt. of Odisha S.M.E. Department and order dated // 2 //

05.11.2014 of the D.E.O., Kendrapara vide Annexure-7, 10 & 8 with cost.

Necessary direction be issued to the Opp. Party No.1 to finalize the representation of the petitioner under Annexure-12 within a time as stipulated by this Hon'ble Court.=

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that through highlighting his grievances, the petitioner has filed a representation vide Annexure-12 to the Writ Petition, but till date nothing has been done in the matter. In such background, he prays that a direction be issued to opposite party No.1 to take a decision on the above noted petition within a specific time period.

5. Considering the submissions made and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court directs opposite party No.1 to take a decision on the above noted petition in accordance with law taking into account Annexure-11, within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order and communicate the result of such exercise to the petitioner.

6. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge

Basudev