Orissa High Court
Pranab Kumar Padhy vs State Of Odisha And Others ..... ... on 19 June, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.16369 of 2025
Pranab Kumar Padhy ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
Prasanta Kumar Panda
-versus-
State Of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties
Mr. U.R. Jena, AGA
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
MOHAPATRA
ORDER
19.06.2025
Order No.
01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned
counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ application as
well as the documents annexed thereto.
3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the
following prayer:
"In the above facts and circumstances of the
case, it is therefore most humbly prayed that
Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to
admit this writ petition, issue notice to the Opp.
Parties to show cause as to why the prays made
hereunder shall not be allowed and upon
perusing the cause, if any shown, pleased to;
i. issue a writ in the nature of mandamus
directing the Opp. Parties to appoint the
petitioner under compassionate ground in
consonance with the provisions of Odisha
Civil Services (Rehabilitation Assistance)
Rules, 1990 forthwith;
And further be pleased to pass such other
order/orders as may be deemed just and
proper;"
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that
the father of the Petitioner was working as Head Warder in Sub-jail,
Laxmipur, Koraput. While working as such, the father of the
Petitioner died in harness on 18.12.2012 leaving behind his legal
heirs including the present Petitioner. He further contended that after
the death of the government employee the elder brother of the present
Petitioner had filed an application for appointment on compassionate
ground but he passed away on 02.06.2013. Thereafter, the present
Petitioner applied for appointment on compassionate ground under
the OCS (RA) Rules, 1990. At this juncture, learned counsel for the
Petitioner further contended that although the Petitioner is eligible to
be appointed on compassionate ground, however, the Opposite
Parties have not taken any decision even though more than a
decade's time has elapsed in the meantime. Being aggrieved by such
illegal inaction on the part of the Opposite Parties, the Petitioner has
approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.
5. In course of his argument, learned counsel for the Petitioner
referred to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Malaya
Nanda Sethy v. State of Orissa and others reported in 2022(II)
OLR(SC)-1 as well as the judgment of this Court in Bindusagar
Samantaray v. State of Odisha & Ors. in W.A. No.810 if 2021
decided on 25.09.2023 and in Biswajit Swain v. State of Odisha and
others in W.P.(C) No.5214 of 2021 decided on 31.10.2023 and in the
case of Suchitra Bal v. State of Odisha & Ors. by a Division Bench
of this Court in W.P.(C) No.2081 of 2021 decided on 16.03.2023 as
well as in terms of Resolution dated 04.04.2025 of the G.A. & P.G.
Department, contended that the Opposite Parties be directed to
consider the case of the Petitioner in terms of the notification dated
04.04.2025 as expeditiously as possible.
6. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that
although he has no instruction in the matter, however, on a perusal of
the pleadings made in the writ petition, it appears that the application
of the Petitioner is still pending before the Opposite Parties. In such
view of the matter, learned counsel for the State contended that in the
event this Court directs the Opposite Parties to consider the
application of the Petitioner in accordance with law and within a
stipulated period of time, he will have no objection to the same.
7. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels
appearing for the respective parties, on a careful analysis of their
submissions and on a close scrutiny of the documents annexed to the
writ petition, further keeping in view the date of death of the
deceased government employee as well as the ratio laid down by this
Court as well as the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above noted
judgments, and taking note of the notification dated 04.04.2025, this
Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ petition at the stage of
admission by directing the Opposite Party No.2 to consider and
dispose of the application of the Petitioner in terms of the notification
dated 04.04.2025 within a period of three months from the date of
communication of a certified copy of today's order. The Opposite
Party No.2 shall do well to dispose of the representation of the
Petitioner by passing a speaking and reasoned order. The final
decision so taken be communicated to the Petitioner within ten days
thereof.
8. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ application
stands disposed of.
Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.
( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra )
Judge
S.K. Rout
Digitally Signed Page 4 of 4.
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 23-Jun-2025 10:49:10
