Rakesh Chandra Ghadei @ vs ) State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Parties
2025 Latest Caselaw 830 Ori

Orissa High Court

Rakesh Chandra Ghadei @ vs ) State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Parties on 3 July, 2025

Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra

Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                             WP(C) No.16489 of 2025
            Rakesh Chandra Ghadei @       .....      Petitioner
            Ghadai
                                                               Represented By Adv. -
                                                               Chinmayi Tripathy

                                            -versus-
            1) State Of Odisha                         .....       Opposite Parties
            2) Commandant General Of Home                      Represented By Adv. -
            Guards In Odisha, Cuttack                          Mr.J.K.Bal, AGA
            3) Commandant Home Guards,
            Berhampur

                                  CORAM:
                    THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
                                MOHAPATRA

                                         ORDER

03.07.2025

Order No.

02. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).

2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. Perused the Writ Petition as well as the documents annexed thereto.

3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the following prayer:

"The Petitioner therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to:

i) Admit this writ application, issue notice to the Opposite Parties and call for the records; And

ii) Issue a Writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or direction by quashing

the Office D.O. No.8 dated 03.02.2025 issued by the Commandant, Home Guards, Berhampur declaring the same as arbitrary, unjust and illogical in the eye of law; And

iii) Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus to the Opposite Parties to reinstate the Petitioner in service with all service and financial benefits in the interest of justice;

And/or pass any other order as may be deemed just and proper in the circumstances of this case;"

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that the Petitioner was initially appointed as Home Guard on 22.09.2019. Thereafter, he was entangled in a criminal case. Accordingly, the Petitioner was disengaged from service by virtue of the order of the Commandant, Home Guards. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submitted that in the meantime the Petitioner faced trial in the criminal case and the learned Assistant Sessions Judge.-cum- C.J.M, Ganjam, Berhampur vide order dated 24.12.2024 has been pleased to acquit the accused persons including the Petitioner. He further submitted that after acquittal of the Petitioner in the criminal case, the Petitioner had approached the Commandant, Home Guards, Berhampur to reconsider the case of the Petitioner to reinstate him in service. However, no action has been taken on such prayer of the Petitioner. In course of his argument, learned counsel for the Petitioner, referring to the judgment dated 24.12.2024 under Annexure-5, submitted before this Court that since the Petitioner has been acquitted in the criminal case, his case is to be considered in the light of the law laid down in the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ram Lal vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.

reported in (2024) 1 SCC 175 as well as the judgment of this Court in the case of Smt. Nirmala Sahoo vs. State of Odisha & others in W.P.(C) No.25947 of 2022 disposed of on 24.03.2023, however no decision has been taken for reinstatement of the Petitioner in service.

5. Learned Additional Government Advocate on the other hand contended that the Petitioner has approached this Court directly without approaching the authority. In the event this Court grants liberty to the Petitioner to approach the Opposite Parties for redressal of his prayer in terms of the law laid down in a time bound manner, he shall have no objection to the same.

6. Having heard learned counsels for the respective parties and further keeping in view the nature of dispute involved in the present case, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the Writ Petition by granting liberty to the Petitioner to approach Opposite Party no.3 by filing a detailed representation taking therein all the grounds, annexing all the relevant documents along with the judgments referred to herein above within three weeks. In such eventuality, the Opposite Party No.3 shall consider the case of the Petitioner in the light of the law laid down in the aforesaid judgments and dispose of the representation of the Petitioner by passing a speaking and reasoned order within a period of four weeks. The final decision so taken be communicated to the Petitioner within 10 days thereafter.

7. With the aforesaid observation/direction, the writ

application stands disposed of.

8. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.

( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge RKS

Designation: AR-CUM-Senior Secretary