Orissa High Court
Nabin Kumar Sahu vs ) State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Parties on 28 January, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.2064 of 2025
Nabin Kumar Sahu ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
Jagabandhu Sahu
-versus-
1) State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Parties
2) Commandant General, Home Represented By Adv. -
Guards And Director General Of Mr.Akshaya Pati, ASC
Police, Fire Service, Odisha.
3) Deputy Commandant General,
Home Guard, Odisha.
4) The Superintend-cum-commandant,
Home Guards, Bargarh.
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
MOHAPATRA
Order No.
ORDER
28.01.2025
01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement
(Virtual/ Physical Mode).
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as the
learned Additional Standing Counsel. Perused the Writ Petition
as well as the documents annexed thereto.
3. The Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition with the
following prayer :
" It is, therefore humbly prayed that this Hon'ble
Court may graciously be pleased to issue Rule Nisi
calling upon the Opposite Parties to show cause as to
why a direction shall not be issued to the Opposite
parties to consider the representation under Annexure-
5 series for reinstating in service and as to why the
Petitioner shall not be allowed to continue as Home
Guard in the Bargarh district with all service benefits
and on perusal of causes shown if any, or any
insufficient causes shown make the said Rule absolute;
And may pass such other order/orders,
direction/directions as deemed just and proper."
4. It is stated by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that
while the Petitioner was working under Commandant-cum-
Superintendent of Police, Bargarh as Home Guard, he was
entangled in a criminal case. Further, he contended that
because of his involvement in the criminal case, the Petitioner
was suspended. Thereafter, he was tried and acquitted by the
trial court. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the
Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner be reinstated in service
as he has already been acquitted.
5. Learned Additional Standing Counsel on the other hand
submitted that he has no instruction as to whether the State
has preferred any appeal against the judgment of acquittal. He
further contended that in the event this Court directs the
Petitioner to approach Opposite Party No.4 by filing a
representation with a further direction to Opposite Party no.4 to
consider the same in accordance with law and dispose of the
same within a stipulated period of time.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the Petitioner, on careful examination of the
background facts, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the
representation by granting liberty to the Petitioner to file a fresh
representation along with certified copy of this order within two
weeks from today. The Opposite Party no.4 shall do well to
consider the same in accordance with law and dispose of the
same by passing a speaking and reasoned order within six
weeks from the date of communication of the certified copy of
this order. Final decision so taken be communicated to the
Petitioner within two weeks .
7. With the aforesaid observation/direction, the Writ Petition
stands disposed of.
( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra)
RKS Judge
Location: High Court of Orissa
