Sanjukta Nag vs State Of Odisha & Others .... Opposite ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 6635 Ori

Orissa High Court

Sanjukta Nag vs State Of Odisha & Others .... Opposite ... on 4 April, 2025

Author: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy

Bench: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy

                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                                   W.P.(C) No.4493 of 2025

                                   Sanjukta Nag                          ....                      Petitioner
                                                                              Mr. M.K. Chand, Advocate
                                                                  -versus-

                                   State of Odisha & Others              ....           Opposite Parties
                                                                                     Mr. M.K. Das, ASC

                                                      CORAM:
                                          JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
                                                                    ORDER

04.04.2025 Order No.

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

2. Heard Mr. M.K. Chand, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. M.K. Das, learned Addl. Standing Counsel appearing for the Opp. Parties.

3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ petition inter alia with the following prayer:-

"Under such circumstances, the Petitioner therefore Pray that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be Pleased to Admit the Writ Application, issue RULE NISI calling upon the Opp. Parties more especially Opp-Party No.3 and 4 to show Cause as to why the rejection of Petitioner's Application for Appointment under R.A Scheme vide Office Order as per Annexure- 6 shall not be declared as illegal. Arbitrary and

Designation: Junior Stenographer

Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 08-Apr-2025 17:50:54 // 2 //

Contrary to Law and thereby quashed passed by this Hon'ble Court.

And upon showing no cause or in sufficient cause the Rule be made absolute by allowing the writ application by quashing the Office Order as per Annexure-6 with a further Direction to the Opp. Parties more especially Opp. Party No.3 and 4 to issue Appointment Order in favour of the Petitioner as per her entitlement in view of the Gradation List as per Annexure No.3 and to extend all consequential Service and Financial benefit entitled by her in accordance with Law.

And to pass any other Order/Orders and to grant any relief/reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper.

And for such act of kindness the Petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray."

4. It is contended that on the death of the Petitioner's father on 18.03.2001, Petitioner made an application to get the benefit of appointment under Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme and at that point of time Petitioner was unmarried. It is further contended that subsequently in terms of Govt. notification dated 05.11.2016 so issued by the General Administration Department and further notification issued by the Department of School & Mass Education on 22.12.2016 claim of the Petitioner was considered and

Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 08-Apr-2025 17:50:54 // 3 //

in the District Level Selection Committee Meeting held in Nuapada district on 01.11.2019, Petitioner was placed in the select list at Sl. No.3.

4.1. However, on the ground that Petitioner in the meantime has got married on 16.05.2015. Petitioner's claim was rejected vide the impugned office order dated 02.01.2025 under Annexure-6.

4.2. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that since on due consideration of the Petitioner's application Petitioner was found eligible to get the benefit of appointment under Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme in the proceeding of the meeting dated 01.11.2019, claim of the Petitioner could not have been rejected on the ground that Petitioner got married in the meantime on 16.05.2015.

4.3. It is also contended that eligibility of married daughters to get the benefit of appointment under R.A. Scheme is no more res integra in view of decision of this Court in the case of Kshirabadhi Bala Behera Vs. OAT & Others disposed of on 24.08.2022. This Court in Para-46 & 47 of the Judgment in Kshirabadhi Bala Behera has held as follows:.

"46. From the factual and legal analysis, as made above, it emanates that institution of marriage is an important and basic civil right of man and woman and marriage by itself is not a

Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 08-Apr-2025 17:50:54 // 4 //

disqualification and impugned policy of the State Government barring and prohibiting the consideration of the 'married' daughter from seeking compassionate appointment merely on the ground of marriage is plainly arbitrary and violative of constitutional guarantees, as envisaged in Articles 14, 15, and 16(2) of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the word 'unmarried', as prescribed in Rules, 1990 and Rules, 2020 is hereby struck down being unconstitutional and ultra vires being violative of Articles 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

47. As a fallout and consequence of aforesaid discussions, the orders dated 06.05.2015 and 29.06.2015 passed by the Tribunal in O.A. No.1063 (C) of 2015 and M.P. No.637(C) of 2015 respectively cannot be sustained in the eye of law and accordingly the same are liable to quashed and are hereby quashed. As a consequence thereof, refusal to grant benefit to the 'married' daughter for consideration of compassionate appointment is hereby declared void and inoperative. Hence, the order impugned passed by the authority in rejecting the petitioner's case for compassionate appointment is hereby quashed. Accordingly, the opposite parties are directed to reconsider the claim of the petitioner for being appointed on compassionate ground afresh in accordance with law keeping in mind the fact that her father was died on 12.12.2010 and her

Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 08-Apr-2025 17:50:54 // 5 //

application was rejected on 17.11.2014 after four years."

4.4. It is contended that this Court in the aforesaid decision has already held that married daughters are also eligible to get the benefit of appointment under R.A. Scheme. It is also contended that placing reliance on the decision passed in the case of Kshirabadhi Bala Behera, this Court allowed similar prayer vide order dtd.06.02.2024 in W.P.(C) No. 2426 of 2017. This Court in Para 6 of the said order has held as follows:-

"6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made as well as the decisions relied on by the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner, this Court while disposing the writ petition, directs Opp. Party No. 3 to take a final decision on the claim of the Petitioner to get the benefit of appointment under the provisions of Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme taking into account the vacancy available as against the post of Peon in Dhansar Krushak High School, Dhansar, Banki, Cuttack within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of this order. It is however made clear that since Petitioner has got married in the meantime, claim of the Petitioner cannot be rejected in view of the decision of this Court so cited (supra). The decision so taken be communicated to the Petitioner within the aforesaid time period."

Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 08-Apr-2025 17:50:54 // 6 //

4.5. Placing reliance on the aforesaid decisions, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that the ground on which claim of the Petitioner has been rejected vide the impugned order dtd.02.01.2025 under Annexure-6 is not sustainable in the eye of law and requires interference of this Court.

5. Learned Addl. Govt. Advocate though on the other hand supported the impugned order, but contended that in view of the decision rendered in the case of Kshirabadhi Bala Behera the matter be remitted to Opp. Party No. 3 to take a fresh decision.

6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made and placing reliance on the decision in the case of Kshirabadhi Bala Behera so cited (supra) and covered by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 2426 of 2017, this Court is inclined to quash the rejection of the Petitioner's claim vide the impugned order dtd.02.01.2025 so passed by Opp. Party No. 3 under Annexure-6. While quashing the said order, this Court remits the matter to Opp. Party No. 2 to take a fresh decision on the claim of the Petitioner in the light of the judgment passed in the case of Kshirabadhi Bala Behera so followed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 2426 of 2017. This Court directs Opp. Party No. 3 to take a fresh decision within a period of two (2) months from

Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 08-Apr-2025 17:50:54 // 7 //

the date of receipt of this order with due communication to the Petitioner.

7. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of.

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge

Ranjeeta

Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 08-Apr-2025 17:50:54