Orissa High Court
State Of Odisha vs Sri Pragnya Pritam Jena on 7 January, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.A No.1872 of 2023
1. State of Odisha, represented through its Principal Secretary to
Government of Odisha, Department of Home Department; Lok
Seva Bhawan, Sachibalaya Marg, Bhubaneswar, Dist.-Khurda.
2. The Director General & Inspector General of Police, Odisha,
At/PO: Buxi Bazar, Dist.- Cuttack.
3. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Western Range,
Rourkela, Dist. Sundargarh.
4. Superintendent of Police, Sundargarh, At/PO/Dist.
Sundargarh.
...Appellants
-Versus-
1. Sri Pragnya Pritam Jena, Son of Prasanna Kumar Jena,
At: Medical Road, Bank, PO/PS: Banki, Dist. Cuttack, presently
working as OIC, Sargipali Outpost under Lefripada Police
Station, At/PO: Sargipali, Dist. Sundargarh.
...Respondent
Advocates appeared in the case:
For the Appellants : Mr. M. K. Khuntia,
Additional Government
Advocate
For Respondent : Dr. J. K. Lenka, Advocate with
Mr. P. R. Chhatoi, Advocate
W.A. No.1872 of 2023 Page 1 of 5
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
JUDGMENT
07.01.2025
Chakradhari Sharan Singh, CJ.
1. The State of Odisha has preferred the present intra-Court appeal
putting to challenge an order dated 27.02.2023 passed by a learned
Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(C) No.5920 of 2023 filed by the
respondent.
2. The respondent was holding the post of Sub-Inspector of Police
and had filed the writ petition i.e. W.P.(C) No.5920 of 2023 seeking a
direction to the State of Odisha / its officials to grant him promotion to
the rank of Inspector of Police from the date the persons junior to him
were granted promotion to the said post of Inspector, with seniority and
all consequential benefits. The said writ petition was filed on
24.02.2023 and was listed for fresh admission with defects on
27.02.2023 before the learned Single Judge. It is worthwhile
mentioning the respondent's case for promotion to the post of Inspector
of Police with effect from a date in the year 2022 was considered and
kept in a sealed cover in view of pendency of departmental proceeding
and criminal case against him.
3. On the very same day, when the writ petition was taken up on
27.02.2023, learned Single Judge has granted the relief sought for by
the respondent by the impugned order with a direction to the Director
General and Inspector General of Police to grant promotion to the
respondent to the rank of Inspector of Police from the date his juniors
and batchmates were granted such promotion. The learned Single
Judge, in the impugned order, has however observed that the
promotion so granted shall be subject to final outcome in the criminal
proceeding and that such promotion shall not confer equity in the event
he loses in the criminal case.
4. Various grounds have been taken on behalf of the appellants to
assail the impugned order including the ground that in view of a Co-
ordinate Bench Decision of this Court in the case of State of Odisha
and another v. Joseph Barik (W.A. No.805 of 2021 and batch of writ
appeal allowed on 11.05.2023), no such order could have been passed
since the disciplinary proceeding and a criminal case were pending.
5. However, we are inclined to interfere with the impugned order
on the sole ground that the impugned order was passed on the very first
day granting the respondent full relief without any opportunity to the
appellants / opposite parties in the writ petition to controvert the
averments made in the writ petition. The impugned order is
unsustainable in view of the provisions under Rules 9 and 10 of
Chapter XV of the Rules of the High Court of Orissa, 1948, which lay
down the procedure for disposal of applications filed under Article 226
of the Constitution of India, which read thus:-
CHAPTER - XV
APPLICATIONS UNDER ARTICLES 226, 227 AND 228 OF
THE CONSTITUTION AND RULES FOR THE ISSUE OF
WRITS UNDER THE SAID ARTICLES (EXCEPT WRITS IN
THE NATURE OF HABEAS CORPUS)
9. Unless the Court sees no sufficient cause to admit the
application and rejects it, notice of the application shall be
served on all parties to the proceedings to show cause by a
date fixed and where the application relates to any
proceedings in or before a subordinate Court or authority
and the object is either to compel such Court or any Officer
thereof or any authority to do and act in relation to such
proceedings or to quash them or any order made therein,
notice to show cause shall also be served on such Court or
Officer or authority, as the case may be, with directions to
produce or cause production of the records of the
proceeding along with its or his return. Every notice under
this rule shall be accompanied by copies of the application
and affidavit and annexures, if any.
10. (1) Any answer showing cause against such an
application shall, except with the leave of the Court be
made by filing an affidavit and by serving copies thereof
upon the applicant or his Advocate and also the other
opposite-parties who have entered appearance or their
Advocates, as the case may be, not later than the date fixed
for showing cause.
(2) A further reply or counter-affidavit by any party
to the proceedings, as the circumstances may require, may
be filed with the leave of the Court.
6. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside. Consequently, the
W.P.(C) No.5920 of 2023 stands restored to its original file. The State
of Odisha shall be at liberty to file its counter affidavit within eight
weeks hence.
7. This appeal is allowed with the aforesaid observations.
(Chakradhari Sharan Singh)
Chief Justice
Savitri Ratho, J. I agree.
(Savitri Ratho)
Judge
M. Panda
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
