Orissa High Court
Sunil Kumar Mohanty vs The Institute Of Chemical on 30 November, 2023
Author: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
Bench: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.36320 of 2023
Sunil Kumar Mohanty .... Petitioner
Mr. N. Biswal, Advocate
-versus-
The Institute of Chemical
Technology, Mumbai and
Others .... Opposite Parties
CORAM:
JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
ORDER
30.11.2023
Order No.
03. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid
Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode.
2. Heard Mr. N. Biswal, learned counsel for the
petitioner.
3. The Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition
with the following prayer: -
<It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble
Court may be graciously pleased to admit
this writ petition, issue writ of mandamus or
any other appropriate writ by way of
passing the following orders/directions:-
(i) To quash the impugned order of
punishment passed by the Opp. Party No.3
vide office order dated 05.12.2022 under
Annexure-7.
(ii) To declare the action of the Opp. Party
No.3 by issuing the show-cause notice
dated 17.10.2022 under Annexure-2 as
illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the
principles of Natural Justice as well as
// 2 //
provisions prescribed under Maharashtra
Civil Service (D & A) Rules, 1979.
to reinstate the petitioner in the post of
Assistant Registrar, ICT-IOC, Odisha
Campus, Bhubaneswar with all service and
consequential benefits as admissible under
law in the interest of justice.=
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that
the petitioner was appointed as against the post of
Assistant Registrar (General Administration) in
Institute of Chemical Technology-IOC, Odisha Campus,
Bhubaneswar vide order dated 01.10.2018 under
Annexure-1. It is contended that while continuing as
such when the petitioner was reverted to the post of
Office Superintendent vide office order dated
05.12.2022 under Annexure-7, the petitioner preferred
an appeal before the Hon'ble Chancellor of the
Institution vide Annexure-8. When the same was not
considered, the present writ petition was filed.
5. This Court when raised the question of
maintainability of the Writ Petition against Opp.
Party No.1, learned counsel for the petitioner
contended that the Institute in question is
functioning under the Indian Oil Corporation Limited
in terms of the memorandum of understanding
entered into on 23.04.2018. Copy of the said
Memorandum submitted by the learned counsel for
the petitioner by way of a memo be kept in record.
// 3 //
5.1. Learned counsel for the Petitioner also
contended that in view of the decision of this Court
rendered in the case of Sanjay Kumar Kar Vs.
Principal-cum-Secretary, Bhadrak Institute of
Engineering and Techology and Others, passed in
W.P.(C) No.22221 of 2010, disposed of on
19.02.2019, this Court has already held that a
private body performing public duty is amenable to
writ jurisdiction and it can be issued to any person of
authority for enforcement of any fundamental rights
or in any other purpose.
5.2. View of this Court expressed in Para-20 of the
said judgment reads as follows:-
<20. Applying to the present case the tests laid
down in Pradip Kumar Biswas, Ajay Hasia,
Virendra Kumar Srivastava (supra) and also
Ramesh Ahluwalia (supra) and keeping in view
the law laid down by the apex Court in V.R.
Rudani and Chandra Mohan (supra), this Court is
of the considered view that a private body
performing public duty is amenable to writ
jurisdiction and, as held by the apex Court,
under Article 226 writ can be issued to any
person or authority for enforcement of any of the
fundamental rights or in any other purpose.
Therefore, taking into consideration me nature of
duty discharge by the opposite party no.1
educational institution to be a public duty, this
Court holds that the writ application as against
the opposite party no.1 institution is
maintainable. By holding so, issue No.(1) is
answered in affirmative.=
5.3. Placing reliance on the aforesaid decision and
the contention that the institute is managed by
Indian Oil Corporation Limited, learned counsel for
// 4 //
the Petitioner contended that Writ Petition against
the institute-O.P. No.1 is maintainable.
6. This Court placing reliance on the aforesaid
decision is also the view that Institute of Chemical
Technology, Mumbai is amenable to writ jurisdiction
of this Court.
6.1. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the nature of grievance raised, this Court
while disposing the Writ Petition permits the
petitioner to make an appropriate application before
Opp. Party No.1 for consideration of his grievance
with regard to his reversion from the post of
Assistant Registrar to the post of Office
Superintendent vide order dated 05.12.2022 under
Annexure-7. It is observed that if any such
application is moved before Opp. Party No.1, within a
period of 3 (three) weeks from today, Opp. Party No.1
shall take a lawful decision on the same, within a
period of 3(three) months from the date of receipt of
this order.
7. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.
(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy)
Judge
Basudev
Designation: Senior Stenographer
Reason: Authentication of order
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 01-Dec-2023 17:47:43
