Orissa High Court
Goura Hari Patra vs ) State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Parties on 26 March, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.8556 of 2025
Goura Hari Patra ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
Dilip Kumar Sahu
-versus-
1) State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Parties
2) Director Of Ayush, Odisha Represented By Adv. -
3) District Ayurvedic Medical Ms. B.K.Sahoo, A.G.A.
Officer, Bolangir
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
MOHAPATRA
ORDER
26.03.2025
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:
"It It is therefore, prays that this Hon"ble Court would be
graciously pleased to admit this writ application, issue
rule NISI calling upon the Opposite Parties to file show
cause as to why the they shall not be directed to consider
the cases of petitioner for regularization along with grant
all consequential service and financial benefits to him as
admissible to the posts held by him with effect date of
approval, as per Judgement dated 27/02/2023 in the
matter of Bijay Kumar Behera and others -Versus- state
of Odisha and others in W.P.(C) No.38547 of 2020
within a stipulated time.
In the event of the Opposite Parties fail to file show cause
or show insufficient cause , then the said rule may be
made absolute and issues a Writ in the nature of
mandamus/certiorari or any other appropriate Writ or
Writs directing the opposite parties to regularized the
petitioner along with grant all consequential service and
financial benefits to the him as admissible to the posts
held by him with effect date of approval, as per
Judgement dated 27/02/2023 in the matter of Bijay
Kumar Behera and others -Versus- state of Odisha and
others in W.P.(C) No.38547 of 2020 within a stipulated
time."
4. It is stated by learned counsel for the Petitioner that although
the Petitioner is working as a Sweeper-cum-Night Watchman in the
Government Homeopathy Dispensary, Cuttack & Jagatsinghpur
District for last 20 years uninterruptedly, however, his service has not
been regularized. He further contended that although the Petitioner
had approached the Opposite Party No.1 by filing a representation on
28.10.2024, however, no decision has been taken on such
representation under Annexure-6 to the writ petition. Being
aggrieved by such inaction by the Opposite Party No.1, the Petitioner
has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.
5. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that
since the Petitioner has approached the Opposite Party No.1, who is
the competent authority and in the event any such representation is
pending before the Opposite Party No.1, she will have no objection
in the event this Court direct the Opposite Party No.1 to take a lawful
decision on the representation of the Petitioner dated 28.10.2024 in
accordance with law within a stipulated period of time.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels
appearing for the respective parties, on a careful analysis of their
submission and on a close scrutiny of the document annexed to the
writ petition, further keeping in view the decision of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Jaggo v. Union of India & others
reported in 2024 SCC Online SC 3826 and in the case of Secretary,
State of Karnataka -v.- Uma Devi, reported in (2006) 4 SCC 1 as
well as in State of Karnataka and others v. M.L. Keshari and others
reported in 2010(II) OLR (SC) 982 and in the case of Sripal and
another V. Nagar Nigam, Gaziabad decided on 31st January, 2025 in
Civil Appeal No.8158-8179 of 2024, this Court deems it proper to
dispose of the writ petition at the stage of admission by directing the
Opposite Party No.1 to consider and dispose of the representation of
the Petitioner in light of the aforesaid judgments within a period of
three months from the date of communication of a certified copy of
today's order. The Opposite Party No.1 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 thereafter.
7. 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
Rubi
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
