State Of Orissa And Others vs Ganesh Chandra Bhyuan And Another
2025 Latest Caselaw 4390 Ori

Orissa High Court

State Of Orissa And Others vs Ganesh Chandra Bhyuan And Another on 24 February, 2025

Bench: Arindam Sinha, M.S. Sahoo

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                 W.A. No.296 of 2025

            State of Orissa and others                 ....             Appellants
                                                         Represented by Adv.-
                                 Mr. B. Dash, Additional Government Advocate
                                         -Versus-

            Ganesh Chandra Bhyuan and another ....                    Respondents
                                                         Represented by Adv.-
                                         Mr. Budhadev Routray, Senior Advocate

                                 CORAM:
                  THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA,
                          ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
                                   AND
                    THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. SAHOO

                                          ORDER

24.02.2025

Order No. W.A. no.296 of 2025 and I. A. no.756 of 2025

01. 1. Mr. Das, learned advocate, Additional Government

Advocate appears on behalf of applicants/appellants (State) and

submits, the appeal carries contentions that require adjudication.

They are regarding regularization. The learned single Judge erred

on facts and in law to deliver judgment dated 15th November,

2023. To enable his clients to exercise its right of appeal, reported

delay of 410 days be condoned.

2. Mr. Routray, learned senior advocate appears on behalf of

respondents and submits, his clients have also preferred appeal

(W.A. no.3071 of 2023). Direction in paragraph 13.3 of impugned

judgment is what his clients are aggrieved by. The paragraph is

reproduced below.

"13.3. Since the representation(s) of the petitioners has been pending since 2014, the opposite party No.1 is directed to complete the entire exercise, as discussed above, within a period of three months hence."

3. The learned single Judge after having adjudicated on the

controversy said, since the representation was pending, direction

made to complete the exercise within period of three months.

Respondents are aggrieved because mandamus was not directed

pursuant to the adjudication. Proof of the pudding is State has

appealed instead of on dealing with representation.

4. In view of aforesaid, we think fit to condone the delay and

admit the appeal. The application is disposed of.

5. List under same heading on 6th March, 2025 along with

W.A. no.3071 of 2023.

( Arindam Sinha ) Acting Chief Justice

( M.S. Sahoo ) Judge M. Panda/A. Nanda

Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 24-Feb-2025 19:19:00