Orissa High Court
Rakesh Kumar Mishra vs State Of Odisha And Others ..... ... on 21 April, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.10375 of 2025
Rakesh Kumar Mishra ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Sukanta Kumar Dalai
-versus-
State Of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Jayant Kumar Bal,
AGA
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA
ORDER
21.04.2025
Order No.
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-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ petition as well
as the documents annexed thereto.
3. The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner with the
following prayers:-
"It is, therefore, humbly prayed that this
Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit
the writ petition, issue rule nisi calling upon the
opposite parties to show cause as to why
appropriate writ in the nature mandamus shall not
be given to the opposite parties more especially
opposite party no.2 i.e. Collector Subarnapur for
absorption of the petitioner to the post of
Accountant-cum-Data Entry Operators in view of
the Notification 27.2.2024 in selecting him to the
post of Accountant-cum-Data Entry Operators
forthwith with retrospective service benefits in
declaring said action as illegal, arbitrary, mala fide
and contrary to the settled principles of Law.
And pass such other order/orders as would be
deemed fit and proper."
4. It is stated by Mr. Sukanta Kumar Dalai, learned counsel for the
Petitioner submitted that initially the Petitioner was engaged as Gram
Rojgar Sevak (GRS) w.e.f. 02.02.2008. He further contended that the
Petitioner continued to work as such till the year 2022. In the year
2022, the State Government created 7142 posts of Accountant-cum-
DEO under Annexure-1 to the writ petition. He further contended that
to recruit people in the aforesaid posts, the State Government also
framed the rule under Article-309 of the Constitution of India, which
was notified by Notification dated 27.02.2024 of the Panchayati Raj &
D.W. Department, Government of Odisha. Further, referring to
proviso to Rule-10 of the aforesaid rule, learned counsel for the
Petitioner contended that, as a one time measure, the persons who are
working as GRS and have completed 5 (five) years of continuous
service in the meantime shall be absorbed on regular posts against the
vacant posts of Accountant-cum-Data Entry Operators subject to
fulfilment of other conditions of service and relaxation of upper age
limit, if required. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submitted
that in the meantime the name of the Petitioner along with other
eligible candidates have also been recommended for regularization of
their service as Accountant-cum-Date Entry Operator by the Block
Development Officer, Tarbha, Opposite Party No.4. Since no action
has been taken pursuant to the rules under Annexure-2 as well as
recommendation of the Block Development Officer, Tarbha under
Annexure-4 Series, despite sanctioned posts are lying vacant, the
Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.
5. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, contended that
on a close scrutiny of the writ petition, it appears that the Petitioner has
not approached the competent authority before approaching this Court
by filing the present writ petition. He further contended that in the
event this Court directs the competent authority, i.e. the Collector,
Subarnapur, Opposite Party No.2, to consider the grievance of the
Petitioner in accordance with law and within a stipulated period of
time, he will have no objection to the same.
6. Taking into consideration the submissions made by the learned
counsels appearing for the respective parties and on a careful
examination of the background facts, further taking note of the
documents annexed to the writ petition, particularly the rules which
were notified vide Notification dated 27.02.2024 under Annexure-2,
this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ petition at the stage of
admission by granting liberty to the Petitioner to approach the Opposite
Party No.2 by filing a detailed representation taking therein all the
grounds along with all supporting documents within three weeks from
today. In such eventuality, the Opposite Party No.2 shall do well to
consider the grievance of the Petitioner involved in such representation
keeping in view the provisions of the rules under Annexure-2 to the
writ petition as well as the fact that sanctioned posts of Accountant-
cum-Data Entry Operator are lying vacant in his district and take a final
decision with regard to the absorption of the Petitioner subject to the
Petitioner satisfying all other eligibility criteria as has been mentioned
in the aforesaid rules. Let the entire exercise be concluded within a
period of three months from the date of communication of a certified
copy of this order. While considering the representation of the
Petitioner, the Opposite Party No.2 shall take into consideration the law
laid down by the coordinate Bench of this Court in Ashis Kumar Debta
v. State of Odisha and others (W.P.(C) No.5838 of 2024 decided vide
judgment dated 09.07.2024). Any final decision so taken by the
Opposite Party No.2 on such representation shall be communicated to
the Petitioner within ten days thereafter.
7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition
stands disposed of.
( A.K. Mohapatra )
Judge
Debasis
