Orissa High Court
Balakrishna Sahoo vs State Of Odisha & Others on 29 July, 2025
Author: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
Bench: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP (C )No.8232 of 2025
Balakrishna Sahoo .... Petitioner
Mr. S.N. Mohapatra,Adv.
-versus-
State of Odisha & Others ....
Opposite Parties
Mr. C.K. Pradhan, AGA
Mr. D. Mohapatra, Sr.Adv.
(for Opp. Nos.2 to 4)
CORAM:
JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
ORDER
Order No. 29.07.2025
5. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid
Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode.
2. Counter affidavit so filed on behalf of Opp. Party
Nos.2, 3 & 4 be kept on record. Copy of the counter is
also served on Mr. S.N. Mohapatra, learned counsel
appearing for the Petitioner in Court.
3. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.
4. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia
challenging order dt.06.03.2025 so passed by Opp.
party No.4 basing on the decision taken by Opp. party
No.2.
5. It is the main contention of the learned counsel
appearing for the Petitioner that challenging the order
// 2 //
of dismissal so confirmed in the appeal, Petitioner was
before this Court in WP(C ) No.3299 of 2020. It is
contended that the said Writ Petition was disposed of
vide judgment dt.08.01.2025 inter alia with the
following direction:
16. In conclusion, the dismissal of the Petitioner is
vitiated by a fundamental lack of jurisdiction and
procedural impropriety. The Principal Secretary, acting
without the requisite authority of the Governing Council,
overstepped his mandate. The violation of natural justice
and statutory provisions renders the dismissal legally
unsustainable.
17. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands allowed. The
impugned order of dismissal issued by the Principal
Secretary, WALMI, is hereby quashed. The Governing
Council, being the competent authority under the Bye-
laws is directed to address the matter in accordance with
law and principles of natural justice. The proceedings
shall be concluded expeditiously and, in any event,
within a period of two months from the date of this
judgment.
5.1. It is contended that without following the orders
so passed by this Court in the earlier Writ Petition and
without being given due opportunity of hearing so
directed, the impugned order was passed on
06.03.2025 by Opp. party No.4 basing on the decision
taken by Opp. Party No.2.
5.2. It is contended that since this Court in its earlier
order directed Opp. party Nos.2 to 4 to take a fresh
decision and by giving due opportunity of hearing to
the Petitioner, the Committee-Opp. party No.2 while
accepting the finding of the inquiry report should have
given a personal hearing to the Petitioner. Since that
// 3 //
was never followed, decision taken by the Committee
so communicated vide the impugned order of Opp.
party No.4 under Annexure-57 is not sustainable in the
eye of law.
6. Learned Sr. Counsel appearing on behalf of Opp.
party No.2 to 4 on the other hand while supporting the
impugned orders contended that since in terms of the
earlier order passed by this Court, the Committee-
Opp.Party No.2 accepted the inquiry report and
confirmed the order of dismissal so passed against the
Petitioner, no illegality or irregularity can be found with
the impugned order so communicated by Opp. party
No.4 under Annexures-57.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the submission made, this Court finds that
challenging the order of dismissal as well the order
passed in appeal so passed by Opp. Parties No.2 to 4,
Petitioner was before this Court in W.P(C ) No.3299 of
2020. The said Writ Petition was disposed of vide
judgment dt. 08.01.2025 inter-alia with the direction
as contained hereinabove.
7.1. This Court after going through the impugned
order and the counter affidavit filed by Opp. party No.2
to 4 finds that while confirming the order of dismissal
by accepting the inquiry report, the direction contained
in judgment dt.08.01.2025 has not been followed by
// 4 //
Opp. party Nos.2 to 4. Since the direction contained in
the said order has not been followed and opportunity of
hearing has not been provided to the Petitioner, this
Court on that ground only is inclined to quash order
dt.06.03.2025 so passed by Opp. party No.4 under
Annexure-57. While quashing the said order, this Court
remits the matter to Opp party No.2 to take a fresh
decision in the light of the directions contained in
judgment dt.08.01.2025.
7.2. This Court directs Opp. party No.2 to take a fresh
decision within a period of two (2) months from the
date of receipt of this order. Petitioner is permitted to
provide a copy of this order before Opp. party No.2 for
compliance.
The Writ Petition accordingly stands disposed of.
(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy)
Judge
Sangita
Reason: authentication of order
Location: high court of orissa, cuttack
Date: 30-Jul-2025 19:04:26
