Himansu Murmu vs State Of Odisha & Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 12952 Ori

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                           W.P.(C) No.34590 of 2023

        Himansu Murmu                          ....                 Petitioner
                                                            Mr. B.S. Das, Advocate

                                                -versus-

        State of Odisha & Ors.                 ....                Opposite Parties
                                                           Mr. M.K. Balabantaray, AGA


                            CORAM:
               JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

                                       ORDER

18.10.2023 Order No

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

2. On the oral prayer made by Mr. B.S. Das, learned counsel for the Petitioner, he is permitted to correct the description of Opp. Party No. 3 in Court today.

3. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the Opposite Parties.

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

"It is therefore humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to;

i) Admit the Writ Petition.

             ii)     Call for the records.
             iii)    Issue Rule Nisi calling upon the Opp. Parties to show

cause as to why the Opp. Party particularly the Opp. Party No. 3 shall not be directed to give appointment to petitioner in considering his application as per Annexure-1 filed under Odisha Civil Service (Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules 1990 in terms of the decision Malaya Nanda Sethy Versus State of Odisha and Judgment dt.13.01.2023 passed by Hon'ble High Court of // 2 //

Orissa In W.P.(C) No. 11105/2022 (Roshan Kerketta Vrs State of Odisha and Others).

And if the Opp. Parties fails to show cause or so insufficient cause the Rule may be made absolute;

And further be pleased to issue a Writ/Writs in the nature of mandamus directing the Opp. Party No. 3 to give appointment to the petitioner under Odisha Civil Service Rehabilitation Assistance Rules, 1990 in the interest of justice.

And further be pleased to hold that the act of Opp. Party in not doing in terms of the decision Malaya Nanda Sethy Versus State of Odisha and Judgment dt.13.01.2023 passed by Hon'ble High Court of Orissa in W.P.(C) No. 11105 of 2022 (Roshan Kerketta Vrs. State of Odisha and others) is illegal and contumacious."

5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that claiming benefit of appointment under the provisions of Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme, Petitioner has made the application as available at Annexure-4 to the Writ Petition before the O.P. No. 3, but till date nothing has been done in the matter. In such background, learned counsel for the Petitioner prays that a direction be issued to Opposite Party No. 3 to take a decision on the above noted application within a specific time period.

6. Considering the submissions made and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court directs Opposite Party No. 3 to take a decision on the above noted application in accordance with law within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of this order and communicate the result of such exercise to the Petitioner.

7. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Sneha