Hemsagar Panigrahi vs State Of Odisha & Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 4562 Ori

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                    W.P.(C) (OAC) No.983 of 2017


         Hemsagar Panigrahi              ....    Petitioner
                                               Mr.C.R. Pattanaik, Advocate

                                        -versus-

         State of Odisha & Others        ....   Opposite Parties
                                              Mr. D.K. Mohanty, ASC



                           COROM:
                JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

                                 ORDER

27.04.2023 Order No

04. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode.

2. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 24.04.2023, Mr. Pramod Kumar Mishra, Secretary, Odisha Public Service Commission appeared before this Court and files a show cause.

3. It is contended in the affidavit that since the earlier counsel engaged by the Commission was disengaged, all files were taken back by the Commission and it is now being distributed among the new panel of counsel.

It is contended that due to such change of the counsel, the new panel of counsel since have not been distributed with the files, they are unable to appear in some cases.

4. This Court is not satisfied with the stand so taken by the deponent in its affidavit. Since the earlier counsel has already been disengaged and all the files are with the Commission, this Court directs the Secretary to allot the briefs among its panel counsel by 5th of May, 2023 // 2 //

positively and no plea will be accepted with regard to non- appearance of the counsels engaged by the Commission before this Court. However, considering the submission, this Court dispense with the personal appearance of the Secretary, O.P.S.C for the time being.

5. Heard Mr. C.R. Pattnaik, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. A. Behera, learned counsel for the Commission.

5.1. The present Writ Petition has been inter alia with the following prayer:-

<i) the respondents may be directed to appoint the applicant in the post of OES lying vacant under the respondent No.3.

ii) And may pass any other order/ orders as this Hon'ble Court deems just and proper=.

5.2. It is contended that the prayer as made in the writ petition is covered by the decision of this Court so passed vide judgment dated 14.10.2009 in W.P.(C) No.8127 of 2009. Memo filed by the Petitioner in Court today along with the judgment and letter issued by the Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment Department of Disability Affairs dated 26.02.2013 be kept in record.

5.3. It is contended that not only the claim of the Petitioner is covered by the decision of this Court as cited (supra), but also his claim is coming within the parameter fixed by the Government of India vide Office Memorandum dated 26.02.2013.

6. Considering such submission of the learned counsel for the Petitioner, this Court while disposing the writ petition permits the Petitioner to move an appropriate application before Opposite Party No.3 within a period of

// 3 //

two weeks from today. It is observed that if any such application is moved within the aforesaid time period, Opposite Party No.3 shall take a lawful decision on the same within a period of three (three) months from the date of receipt of the representation. However, while considering the claim, the decision of this Court as cited (supra) as well as the Office Memorandum dated 26.02.2013 so issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment Department of Disability Affairs be taken into consideration. Petitioner is directed to enclose the copy of the judgment passed in W.P.(C) No.8127 of 2009 and the Office Memorandum dated 26.02.2013 along with his representation for compliance.

7. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Subrat