Orissa High Court
Rama Chandra Mishra vs State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Party on 15 April, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.10196 of 2025
Rama Chandra Mishra ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
Shashi Bhusan Jena
-versus-
State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Party
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. U.C.Jena, A.S.C.
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
MOHAPATRA
ORDER
Order No. 15.04.2025
01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual
/Physical Mode).
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned
counsel for the State.
3. The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner with
the following prayer:-
"Under the abovementioned facts and circumstances of the
case, this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue
a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ/writs by
directing the Opp.Party to revoke the order of suspension
issued vide office order no.4224 dated.6.8.2024 under
Annexure-2.
And further be pleased to direct the opp.party to reinstate
the petitioner in his service and allow him to continue as
Joint Excise Commissioner till his retirement i.e. till
30.06.2025.
Or pass any order/orders as case may be deemed fit and
proper in the interest of justice and equity."
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the Petitioner that the
Petitioner has been placed under suspension since 06.08.2024. In the
meantime, no proceeding has been initiated against the Petitioner and
memorandum of charge has not been filed. However, the petitioner
has not been reinstated and the proceeding has not progressing. In
this context, learned counsel for the Petitioner draws attention of this
Court in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary vrs. Union of India
through its Secretary and another decided on 16.02.2015 by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No.1912 of 2015
arising out of SLP(C) No.31761 of 2013, which is filed under
Annexure-4 to the writ petition.
5. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Petitioner
submits that the Petitioner has submitted a representation along with
the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India before
the Commissioner-cum-Principal Secretary, Excise Department-
Opposite Party and the said Opposite Party has not considered the
same as of now.
6. Learned counsel for the State submits that he has no objection,
if a direction is given to the authorities to consider the representation
of the Petitioner and take decision in the case of Ajay Kumar
Choudhary vrs. Union of India through its Secretary and another
decided on 16.02.2015 by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in
Civil Appeal No.1912 of 2015 arising out of SLP(C) No.31761 of
2013 within a stipulated period of time.
7. Considering the limited nature of grievance, this Court
disposes of the writ petition at the stage of admission with a direction
to the Commissioner-cum-Principal Secretary, Excise Department-
Opposite Party to consider the representation of the Petitioner dated
05.04.2025 under Annexure-10 within a period of two months from
the date of production of certified copy of this order in accordance
with law. In the event it is found that the case of the Petitioner came
in the light of judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of
India Ajay Kumar Choudhary vrs. Union of India through its
Secretary and another(supra). It is needless to mention here that the
representation of the Petitioner shall be considered by a speaking and
reasoned order on the same. Any decision taken on the same shall be
communicated to the Petitioner within a period of ten days thereafter.
8. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed
of.
9. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper
application.
( A.K. Mohapatra)
Judge
Rubi
