State Of Odisha And Others vs Rashmirekha Mohanta And Another
2025 Latest Caselaw 6014 Ori

Orissa High Court

State Of Odisha And Others vs Rashmirekha Mohanta And Another on 18 June, 2025

Author: M.S. Sahoo

Bench: M.S. Sahoo

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                                   W.A. No.2652 of 2024

            State of Odisha and others              ....             Appellants

                                                     Represented By Adv. -
                                                Mr. M.K. Khuntia, Advocate
                                         -versus-

            Rashmirekha Mohanta and another ....                   Respondents
                                                       Represented By Adv. -

                                               Mr. Tanmay Mishra, Advocate
                           CORAM:
                           JUSTICE DIXIT KRISHNA SHRIPAD
                           JUSTICE M.S. SAHOO


                                           ORDER

18.06.2025 Order No. I.A. No.6967 of 2025

02.

1. Appeal is filed after brooking a short delay of 178 days. An

application supported by an affidavit accompanies the appeal

seeking its condonation. Delay is short and explanation offered is

plausible. Added no objections are filed to the subject application.

2. In the above circumstances, application is allowed and

delay is condoned subject to presenting a set of two books authored

by Samaraditya Pal on Service Law to the Advocate's Library of

the High Court of Orissa.

W.A. No. 2652 of 2024 &

3. Learned Additional Government Advocate argues that the

learned single Judge did not have roster jurisdiction. Secondly, the

learned single Judge could not have uttered even one single word

about the vires of a statute or statutory instrument in the absence of

pleadings. Mr. Seervai in his 4th edition in his Magnum Opus Law

of Constitution of India says that there is very a strong presumption

of validity of statues and that no court shall adjudge the validity

unless the question is essential for adjudging the cause brought

before him. There is such a view of the Apex Court Ujagar Prints

and Ors. vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors. reported in AIR 1989

SC 516. Vide State of Rajasthan vs. Prakash Chand and Ors.

reported in AIR 1998 SC 1344 roster is fixed by the Chief Justice

and an order passed outside the roster is ab initio void.

4. Learned advocates representing the respondents vehemently

oppose grant of ad interim relief contending that already the

judgment in question is implemented. Be that as it may there are

arguable points which merit deeper examination at the hands of this

Court. Therefore, appeal is admitted and order of the learned single

Judge is hereby stayed.

5. Call this matter on 28th July, 2025.

(Dixit Krishna Shripad) Judge

(M. S. Sahoo) Judge

Jyostna