Jagan Das vs State Of Odisha And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 12047 Ori

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                                 W.A. No. 1930 of 2023

Jagan Das                               .....                                     Appellant
                                                             Mr. M.K. Mohanty, Advocate
                                        Vs.
State of Odisha and others              .....                                  Respondents
                                                                 Mr. L. Samantaray, AGA
               CORAM:
                   ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DR. B.R. SARANGI
                   MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

                                                 ORDER

05.10.2023

Order No. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

01.

2. Heard Mr. M.K. Mohanty, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. L. Samantaray, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

3. The appellant has filed this writ appeal assailing the order dated 24.07.2023 passed in WPC (OAC) No. 1583 of 2012, by which the learned Single Judge relying on the decision in the case of Pawan Kumar v. Union of India and Another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 532 and Commissioner of Police & Others v. Sandeep Rana, 2011 (I) OLR SC 1105 disposed of the writ petition giving liberty to the appellant to make a fresh application seeking his reengagement before respondent no.3 and the respondent no.3 was directed to take a decision in terms of the foresaid decisions.

4. Mr. M.K. Mohanty, learned counsel for the appellant contended that instead of quashing the disengagement order direction was given to the authority to consider in the light of the aforesaid judgment, thereby learned Single Judge has not acted in consonance with the provisions of law.

5. Mr. L. Samantaray, learned Additional Government Advocate contended that once the principle has already been decided by the apex

Court, the question of re-entertainment and re-examination by this Court does not arise. Therefore, the learned Single Judge has rightly passed the order directing the authorities to act in consonance with the directions issued by the apex Court as mentioned above.

6. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and after going through the record, it appears that the issue having been decided by the apex Court in the aforementioned decisions, there is no necessity to re- consider the same by the learned Single Judge. Therefore, the learned Single Judge has rightly disposed of the writ petition directing the authorities to act in consonance with the decisions mentioned above on the approach being made by the appellant. Thus this Court does not find any error apparent on the face of the order of the learned Single Judge so as to warrant any interference.

7. At this moment, learned counsel for the appellant contended that the time granted by the learned Single Judge to approach the authority concerned may be extended.

8. In that view of the matter, the appellant is granted time for a period of one month from today to approach the authority concerned as directed by the learned Single Judge.

9. The writ appeal is accordingly disposed of with the modification of the impugned order to the above extent.

(DR. B.R. SARANGI) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

Arun (M.S. RAMAN) JUDGE

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: ARUN KUMAR MISHRA Designation: ADR-cum-Addl. Principal Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 06-Oct-2023 16:44:53