Sunday, 03, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Purnima Hati vs State Of Odisha And Others ..... ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 10 Ori

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 10 Ori
Judgement Date : 1 May, 2025

Orissa High Court

Purnima Hati vs State Of Odisha And Others ..... ... on 1 May, 2025

Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                     WP(C) No.18583 of 2024

                 Purnima Hati                          .....                  Petitioner
                                                                  Represented By Adv. -
                                                                  Jibankanta Pattanaik

                                               -versus-

                 State Of Odisha and others               .....       Opposite Parties
                                                                  Mr. S.K. Brahma, ASC


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

                                               ORDER

01.05.2025 Order No.

02. 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 is, therefore, prayed that the Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit the writ petition, issue Rule Nisi calling upon the Opposite Parties to show cause as to why the impugned order No.30450 dated 24.08.2023 passed by the Opp. Party No.1 as communicated vide Letter No.3924/Estt dated 14.09.2023 of Deputy Collector (Estt.), Collectorate, Cuttack to the CDPO, Nischintakoili under Annexure-8 shall not be quashed and if the Opp. Parties fail to show cause or show insufficient cause, the

Hon'ble Court may be pleased to make the rule absolute and quash the impugned order No.30450 dated 24.08.2023 passed by the Opp. Party No.1 as communicated vide Letter No.3924/Estt dated 14.09.2023 of Deputy Collector (Estt.), Collectorate, Cuttack to the CDPO, Nischintakoili under Annexure-8 and issue of a writ of Mandamus directing the Opp. Parties, particularly the Opp. Party No.1 and 3 to give appointment to the petitioner under rehabilitation assistance scheme by completing the exercise required to be undertaken in terms of Rule 6 of the 2020 Rules.;

And pass such other order/orders, as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case;"

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that the father of the Petitioner, namely one Pratap Chandra Hati while working as a Junior Revenue Assistant at the Collectorate, Cuttack died in harness on 25.04.2018. After his death the Petitioner obtained the death certificate on 28.05.2018. He further contended that although the Petitioner applied for grant of Legal Heir Certificate on 05.06.2018, however, due to some dispute the matter lingered for several years. Finally, the dispute with regard to the legal heir attained finality after the Appellate Court decided the dispute when the appeal under the nomenclature of Misc. Appeal No.1/2020 attained finality by virtue of order of the Sub-Collector, Sadar, Cuttack vide order dated 06.08.2021. He further contended that after obtaining the Legal Heir Certificate the Petitioner submitted his application for appointment on compassionate ground. Such application of the Petitioner was kept pending for a long time and finally vide order dated 24.08.2023 the application of the Petitioner

for appointment on compassionate ground was rejected by the Government. Such rejection order was communicated to the Petitioner vide order dated 14.09.2023. Thereafter, the Petitioner approached this Court by filing the present writ petition challenging the order of rejection dated 24.08.2023 as well as the letter of communicated dated 14.09.2023.

5. In course of his argument, learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that by virtue of impugned order dated 24.08.2023 which was communicated to him vide order dated 14.09.2023 under Annexure-8 the Government has rejected the application of the Petitioner by applying the provisions of OCS (RA) Rules, 2020. Moreover, it appears that the application of the Petitioner was not entertained as there was an inordinate delay of two years in approaching the authorities for his engagement on compassionate ground. In the aforesaid context, learned counsel for the Petitioner referring 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, contended that the Opposite Parties has committed a gross illegality by applying the OCS (RA) Rules, 2020 to the part of Petitioner's case. He further contended that in the meantime the OCS (RA) Rules, 2020 has been amended by virtue of the notification dated 04.04.2025 of the GA & PG Department, Government of Odisha.

6. Further, referring to the notification dated 04.04.2025 of the GA & PG Department, Government of Odisha, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that in view of the amendment to Clause-9 of

Rule-6 and keeping in view the proviso inserted, the case of the Petitioner is eligible to be reconsidered for appointment on compassionate ground under the OCS (RA) Rules, 1990 as the death of the father of the Petitioner had occurred much prior to the OCS (RA) Rules, 2020 came into force, i.e. on 17.02.2020. On such ground, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the impugned rejection order under Annexure-8 is unsustainable in law and accordingly the same should be quashed.

7. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that the application of the Petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground has been duly considered by the competent authority and by passing a reasoned order dated 24.08.2023 such application has been rejected and the same has been communicated to the Petitioner vide letter dated 14.09.2023 under Annexure-8 to the writ petition. Learned counsel for the State further submitted that although the father of the Petitioner died prior to the OCS (RA) Rules, 2020 came into force, however, the application for compassionate appointment was made while the OCS (RA) Rules, 2020 was in force. On such ground, learned counsel for the State contended that the present writ petitioner is devoid of merit and that no fault can be found on behalf the Opposite Parties in rejecting the application of the Petitioner by virtue of order dated 24.08.2023 under Annexure-8 to the writ petition.

8. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties, on a careful examination of the background facts as well as the documents annexed to the writ petition, this Court observes that the issue that is required to be addressed in the present writ petition is as to whether the Petitioner is eligible to be reconsidered for appointment on compassionate ground under the OCS (RA) Rules,

1990 and in terms of the notification dated 04.04.2025. The factual position in the present writ petition as pleaded by the Petitioner remains undisputed by both sides. It is also not disputed by the counsels appearing for the Parties that the father of the Petitioner has died on 25.04.2018. Thereafter, the Petitioner after obtaining a Legal Heir Certificate applied for appointment on compassionate ground on 20.04.2022. On perusal of the factual background of the present case, it appears that although the deceased-government employee died prior to the OCS (RA) Rules, 2020 came into force on 17.02.2020, however, the application for appointment on compassionate ground was made on 20.04.2022, i.e. after the OCS (RA) Rules, 2020 came into force. Therefore, the question that falls for consideration is as to whether the case of the Petitioner is to be considered under the OCS (RA) Rules, 1990 of the new Rules in the year 2020.

9. To decide the issue as has been analyzed in the preceding paragraphs, this Court is required to examine the amending provision that was brought into the Rules by virtue of the notification dated 04.04.2025. On a careful analysis of the new Rules of the notification dated 04.04.2025, it appears that while amending Sub-Rule-9 of Rule-6 the Government has incorporated a proviso which has been quoted herein below:-

"Provided that in case the death of Government employee occurred on or after commencement of the Odisha Civil Service (Rehabilitation Assistance) Amendment Rules, 2016 and before commencement of the Odisha Civil Services (Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules, 2020, shall be governed by the provisions of the Odisha Civil Service (Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules, 1990."

On a careful analysis of the aforesaid proviso, this Court observes that the amending Rule-6(9) the State Government has provided a window to the legal heirs of the government employees

who have died in between 2016 to 2020. Further, taking note of such death of the father of the Petitioner, i.e. on 25.04.2018, this Court has no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that the case of the Petitioner is covered under the proviso to the substituted Rule-6(9). As such the case of the Petitioner is required to be considered in terms of the OCS (RA) Rules, 1990.

10. In view of the aforesaid analysis of the legal position as well as keeping in view the factual background of the present case, this Court is of the view that the impugned order dated 24.08.2023 has been communicated to the Petitioner vide letter dated 14.09.2023 under Annexure-8 to the writ petition is unsustainable in law. Accordingly, the order dated 24.08.2023 as well as letter dated 14.09.2023 is hereby quashed. Further, the matter is remanded back to the Opposite Party No.1 to consider the case of the Petitioner afresh in terms of the amended provision, i.e. the notification of the GA & PG Department dated 04.04.2025. In the event the Petitioner approaches the Opposite Party No.1 along with a copy of today's order within two weeks from today, the Opposite Party No.1 shall do well to reconsider the case in the manner as has been directed hereinabove within a period of three months from the date of communication of a certified copy of today's order. The final decision so taken be communicated to the Petitioner within ten days thereafter.

11. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ application stands disposed of.

Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.

( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra )

S.K. Rout Signed by: SANTANU KUMAR ROUT

Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 05-May-2025 11:25:19

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter