Orissa High Court
Dhiren Kumar Naik vs State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite ... on 12 March, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.7152 of 2025
Dhiren Kumar Naik ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
Basudev Barik
-versus-
State of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties
Represented By Adv. -
U.C. Jena, A.S.C.
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
MOHAPATRA
ORDER
12.03.2025
Order No.
01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual
/Physical Mode).
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned
Additional Standing Counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused
the Writ Petition as well as the documents annexed thereto.
3. The present Writ Petition has been filed by the Petitioner with
the following prayer :
"It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may
graciously be pleased to admit the writ application, issue
rule nisi calling upon the Opp. parties to show cause as to
why the letter No-335 dtd.18.01.2023 under Annexure-7
shall not be quashed and the petitioner shall not be
appointed under OCS (Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules,
1990 which was in force at the time of death of his father, if
the Opp. parties fail to file show cause and insufficient
cause make the rule absolute and direct the opp. parties
more particularly Opp. party No-4 give appointment to the
petitioner under OCS (RA) Rule, 1990 within stipulated
time.
And pass any other order/orders, direction/directions
as this Hon'ble Court would be deem fit and proper as facts
an circumstances of the case."
4. It is stated by learned counsel for the Petitioner that the father
of the Petitioner, while working under the W.R. Dept., Govt. of
Odisha as Watchman, died in harness on 11.01.2020 leaving behind
his wife, three sons and one daughter. Thereafter, the present
petitioner, being one of the son, is eligible for appointment on
compassionate ground submitted an application immediately after the
death of his father on 24.01.2020 under the OCS (RA) Rules, 1990.
He further submitted that the Opposite Parties, vide order dated
18.01.2023 under Annexure-7 to the writ application, have rejected
the application of the Petitioner for compassionate appointment by
applying the provisions of the OCS (RA) Rules, 1990 and in terms of
the G.A. & P.G. Dept., Govt. of Odisha notification dated
17.02.2020. In the aforesaid context, learned counsel for the
Petitioner submitted that the date of death as well as the date of
application is not disputed by the Opposite Parties. However,
Opposite Parties have committed an illegality by applying the OCS
(RA) Rules, 2020.
5. In course of his argument, learned counsel for the petitioner
referred to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Malaya Nanda Sethy vrs. State of Orissa and others : reported in
2022(II) OLR(SC)-1 decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the
judgment of this Court in Suchitra Bal vs. 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 Bindusagar Samantaray vs. State of
Odisha & ors. by a Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No.810 of
2021 decided on 25.09.2023 and submitted before this Court that
taking into consideration the date of death of the deceased
government employee and the date of application, the application of
the Petitioner should have been considered under the OCS (RA)
Rules, 1990. Further, referred to the judgment of this Court in the
case of Biswajit Swain vs. State of Odisha and others in W.P.(C)
No.5214 of 2021 decided on 31.10.2023, wherein this Court has
already declared the Rule-6 (9) of the OCS (RA) Rules, 2020 was
ultra vires. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the
petitioner submitted that the Opposite Parties have committed an
illegality by rejecting the application of the Petitioner for
appointment on compassionate ground vide under Annexure-7 to the
writ application.
6. Learned Additional Standing Counsel on the other hand
contended that the application of the Petitioner was duly considered
and since it was found that the Petitioner has failed to secure the
required number of marks, his case has been rejected as the Petitioner
was found ineligible for such appointment. In such view of the
matter, learned Additional Standing Counsel submitted that the
Opposite Parties have not committed an illegality in passing the
impugned order dated 18.01.2023 under Annexure-7.
7. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective
parties as well as on a careful examination of the background facts of
the present case as well as keeping in view the legal position as
discussed hereinabove, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the
writ application at the stage of admission in the light of the law laid
down by Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as this Court as has been
referred to hereinabove and accordingly the impugned rejection order
dated 18.01.2023 under Annexure-7 is hereby set aside. Further, the
matter is remanded back to the Opposite Party No.4 to reconsider the
application of the Petitioner under the OCS (RA) Rules, 1990 as
amended up to the year 2016 and dispose of the claim of the
Petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground by passing a
speaking and reasoned order within a period of three months from the
date of communication of certified copy of this order by the
Petitioner. The final decision so taken by the Opposite Party No.4 be
communicated to the Petitioner within a period of one week from the
date of taking such a decision.
8. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the writ
application stands disposed of.
Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.
( A.K. Mohapatra )
Judge
Anil
Digitally Signed Page 4 of 4.
Signed by: ANIL KUMAR
SAHOO
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 13-Mar-2025 11:56:15
