Orissa High Court
Panchu Mohapatra vs State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite ... on 6 May, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.11401 of 2025
Panchu Mohapatra ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
Niranjan Biswal
-versus-
State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties
Represented By Adv. -
D. Lenka, A.G.A.
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
MOHAPATRA
ORDER
06.05.2025
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 Government Advocate 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 this Hon'ble Court
may graciously be pleased to admit the case, call for the
records and after hearing the parties issue rule nisi by
way of directing the Opposite parties more particularly
the Opposite party No-1 and 2 to regularize the service
of the petitioners "for a day only" for the purpose of
pension and other pensionary benefits as per Govt.
Resolution dtd-15.05.1997 as well as the law laid down
by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of "Jaggo Vrs.
Union of India and others" reported in AIR 2025 SC
296 as well as "Sripal and Others Vrs. Nagar Nigam,
Ghaziabad" reported in (MANU/SC/0139/2025) within
the time framed by this Hon'ble Court considering the
fact that similarly situated persons have been regularized
by the Opposite Party No.3.
And pass such other orders/directions as deemed
fit and proper."
4. In course of hearing of the writ application, learned counsel
for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner ventilating his
grievance has submitted representation before the Commissioner-
cum-Secretary, Water Resources Department, Odisha, BBSR,
Opposite Party No.1 under Annexure-6. It is also submitted by the
learned counsel for the Petitioner that the said representation is
pending as of now. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for
the Petitioner that a direction be issued to the Opposite Party No.1
to consider the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-6
within a stipulated period of time.
5. Learned Additional Government Advocate submits that he
has no objection if the representation of the Petitioner is
considered by the Opposite Party No.1, which is stated to be
pending, in accordance with law within a stipulated period of
time.
6. Considering the limited nature of grievance of the
Petitioner, the writ application is disposed of at the stage of
admission with a direction to the Opposite Party No.1 to consider
the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-6 taking into
consideration the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
case of Jaggo vs. Union of India and Others, reported in 2024
SCCOnline SC 3826, in Sripal and Anr. vs. Nagar Nigam,
Gaziabad (decided on 31st January, 2025) in Civil Appeal
No.8158-8179 of 2024 within a period of eight weeks from the
date of production of certified copy of this order. The Opposite
Party No.1 shall do well to dispose of the representation of the
Petitioner under Annexure-6 by passing a speaking and reasoned
order. The decision so taken by the Opposite Party No.1 be also
communicated to the Petitioner within ten days thereafter.
7. With the aforesaid observation/ direction, the writ
application stands disposed of.
8. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.
( A.K. Mohapatra )
Judge
Anil
Designation: Junior Stenographer
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 07-May-2025 17:52:03
