Askhaya Kumar Sahoo vs State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 2572 Ori

Orissa High Court

Askhaya Kumar Sahoo vs State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite ... on 13 January, 2025

Author: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy

Bench: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                 WP(C) No. 32533 of 2021
Askhaya Kumar Sahoo          .....       Petitioner
                                                     Mr. S. Jena, Advocate
                                -versus-
State of Odisha & Ors.             .....              Opposite Parties
                                                       Mr. S.K. Jee, AGA


                    CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
                     ORDER

13.01.2025

1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2. Mr. S. Jena, learned counsel entered appearance on behalf of the Petitioner by filing Vakalatnama in Court. The same be kept in record.

3. Heard Mr. S.K. Jena, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Mr. S.K. Jee, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate appearing for the Opp. Parties.

4. Even though this writ petition has been filed with multiple prayers, but in course of hearing learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner confined his prayer to challenge made to order dtd.27.05.2021 so passed by the Govt.-Opp. Party No. 1 under Annexure-7.

5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that claim of the Petitioner for approval of his services was allowed by the Tribunal vide Judgment dtd.03.08.2018 in GIA Case No. 1033 of 2016. It is contended that when order passed by the Tribunal was not implemented, Petitioner approached the authority by making his grievance on different dates. But without taking into consideration

the order passed by the Tribunal in GIA Case No. 1033 of 2016, claim of the Petitioner was rejected vide the impugned order dtd.27.05.2021 under Annexure-7. It is accordingly contended that the impugned order is not sustainable in the eye of law.

6. Mr. S.K. Jee, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate on the other hand contended that since the order passed by the Tribunal in the aforesaid GIA case is under challenge in FAO No. 801 of 2019, claim of the Petitioner to get the benefit in terms of the said order has been rightly rejected vide order under Annexure-7.

7. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made, this Court finds that challenging the order passed by the Tribunal in GIA Case No. 1033 of 2016, State is before this Court in the connected FAO No. 801 of 2019. Since the order passed by the Tribunal in GIA Case No. 1033 of 2016 is under challenge in FAO No. 801 of 2019, this Court finds no illegality or irregularity with the impugned rejection so available under Annexure-7. However, it is observed that such rejection of the Petitioner's claim shall be subject to final outcome of FAO No. 801 of 2019.

8. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid observation.

(BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge

Sneha

Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 15-Jan-2025 12:46:08