Orissa High Court
Manash Kumar Mallik vs State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite ... on 10 February, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.646 of 2025
Manash Kumar Mallik ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
Asish Kumar Ray
-versus-
State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties
Represented By Adv. -
B.K. Sahu, A.G.A.
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
MOHAPATRA
ORDER
10.02.2025
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
Additional Govt. Advocate 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 prayer :
"Therefore the petitioner most respectfully prays that
Your Lordship would graciously be pleased to admit the
case, call for the relevant records and after hearing may be
pleased to:-
(i) direct the Opp. No.4 to dispose of the representation/
Annexure -7 in light of the mandate of the Honorable passed
in the case of Biswajit Swain vrs State of Odisha and others
(ii) Direct Opp.party No.2 to issue appointment order in
favor of the petitioner as per the provisions of Rule 1990
OCS (Rehabilitation Assistant) as extended to other
applicants standing in similar footing.
(iii) And pass any other order/orders, direction/directions
as it would be deemed fit and proper to the facts and
circumstances of the case in order to provide complete
justice to the petitioner."
4. It is stated by learned counsel for the Petitioner that the mother
of the Petitioner died in harness on 08.05.2016 while she was in govt.
service. Thereafter, the present Petitioner applied for a job on
compassionate ground under the OCS (RA) Rules, 1990 on
26.11.2016. Learned counsel for the petitioner at this juncture
contended that the aforesaid application has been filed within the
limitation as stipulated under the OCS (RA) Rules, 1990. However,
the authorities has not taken any action on such application although,
many similarly situated persons have been given appointment under
the OCS (RA) Rules, 1990. He further contended that being
aggrieved by such inaction on the part of the opposite parties, the
Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ
application.
5. In course of his argument, learned counsel for the petitioner
further referring to the judgment of this Court by a Division Bench in
Bindusagar Samantaray vs. State of Odisha & ors. in W.A. No.810
of 2021 decided on 25.09.2023, contended that the provisions of
Rule-6(9) has been laid down. It was also contended that the
judgments of this bench in Biswajit Swain vs. State of Odisha and
others in W.P.(C) No.5214 of 2021 decided on 31.10.2023, this
Court has declared the provisions contained in Rule-6(9) of the OCS
(RA) Rules, 2020 as ultra vires. In such view of the matter, learned
counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Opposite Parties are
under a legal obligation to consider and dispose of the pending
application of the Petitioner in terms of the OCS (RA) Rules, 1990.
6. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that
as is evident from the writ application that no decision has been taken
on the application of the Petitioner dated 26.11.2016. Therefore, she
will have no objection in the event this Court directs the Opposite
Parties to dispose of the application of the Petitioner under the OCS
(RA) Rules, 1990 dated 26.11.2016 in accordance with law within a
stipulated period of time.
7. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective
parties and on a careful consideration of their submission as well as
the background facts of the present case and keeping in view the law
laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Malaya
Nanda Sethy vrs. State of Orissa and others : reported in 2022(II)
OLR(SC)-1 as well as by this Court in Biswajit Swain's case (supra)
and by a Division Bench of this Court in Bindusagar Samantaray's
case (supra), this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ
application by directing the Opposite Party No.4 to consider the
application of the Petitioner dated 26.11.2016 within a period of three
months from the date of communication of certified copy of this
order by the Petitioner keeping in view the judgments of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Malaya Nanda Sethy's case (supra) as well as this
Court in Biswajit Swain's case (supra) and by a Division Bench of
this Court in Bindusagar Samantaray's case (supra) as has been
referred to hereinabove, in the event the application of the Petitioner
dated 26.11.2016 is still pending. Further, it is directed that the
application dated 26.11.2016 shall be disposed of by passing a
speaking and reasoned order. The final decision so taken by the
Opposite Party No.4 be communicated to the Petitioner within a
period of two weeks from the date of taking such a decision.
8. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the writ
application stands disposed of.
9. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.
( A.K. Mohapatra )
Judge
Anil
Location: High Court of Orissa
