Orissa High Court
Bidyadhar Singh vs State Of Orissa & Ors. ..... Opposite ... on 15 May, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.13865 of 2025
Bidyadhar Singh ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
Prafulla Kumar
Mohapatra
-versus-
State Of Orissa & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties
Represented By Adv. -
Sasmita Nayak, A.S.C.
B.Routray, Adv. for O.P.
Nos.3 & 4
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
MOHAPATRA
ORDER
15.05.2025
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
counsel for the State and Mr. B. Routray, learned counsel for
O.P.-3 & 4. Perused the record.
3. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner
with the following prayers:
"It is therefore, humbly prayed that this Hon'ble
Court may graciously be pleased to:-
i) Direct the Opp.Parties to give appointment to
the Petitioner under Rehabilitation Assistance
Scheme in terms of Odisha Civil Service
(Rehabilitation) Assistance) Rules, 1990 and
amended Rules, 2016, which was prevalent at
the time of death of his father on 10.05.2018 in
the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex
Court, rendered in the case of the State of
Madhya Pradesh and others-v.-Ashish
Awasthi, reported in 2021(ii) OLR (SC) 1072
and Malaya Nanda Sethy-vrs.-State of Odisha
and others in Civil Appeal No.4103/2022,
disposed of on 20.05.2022 thereby quash the
order dated 15.07.2024 vide Annexure-5 as the
same is illegal, arbitrary and not in consonance
with the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court.;
ii) Pass such other order(s) or issue direction(s) as
may be deemed fit and proper in the bona fide
interest of justice."
4. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner
challenging the impugned rejection order dated 15.07.2024 issued
by the Chief Construction Engineer, Rural Works Circle, Angul
(Opposite Party No.3) wherein the Opposite Party No.3 has
rejected the applications of the Petitioner for Rehabilitation
Assistance Scheme.
5. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the
father of the petitioner died on 10.05.2018 and is covered under
the OCS(RA) Rules, 1990. It is further submitted by learned
counsel for the petitioner that although the application has been
submitted by the petitioner i.e. in the year 2019, the Authority sat
over the matter and finally by virtue of the impugned order under
Annexure-5, the same came to the light.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that let
the Authority be directed to consider the case of the petitioner in
the light of the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court
of India in the case of Indian Bank vs. Promila, reported in
(2020) 2 SCC 729, State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Amit Shrivas,
reported in (2020) 10 SCC 496, Hon'ble Apex Court in the case
of The Secretary to Govt., Department of Education (Primary) &
Ors. vs. Bheemesh Alias Bheemappa (Civil Appeal No.7722 of
2021) as well as in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh vs.
Ashish Awasthi, reported in 2021(II) OLR (SC) 1072. It is also
submitted that basing on the said order passed by the Hon'ble
Apex Court the petitioner Malaya Nanda Sethi vrs. State of
Odisha and others, has been provided with the appointment vide
order dated 13.06.2022 of the Government in the Excise
Department. Moreover, it is also submitted that when similar issue
was raised before the Hon'ble Apex Court in Special Leave (C)
No.12740 of 2022. Hon'ble Apex Court relying on the decision of
Malaya Nanda Sethi vrs. State of Odisha and others remanded
the matter for consideration in the light of the judgment passed in
the aforesaid Civil Appeal No.4103 of 2022 as well as in the case
of Biswajit Swain vrs. State of Odisha reported in 2014(I) OLR
190.
7. Having heard leaned counsel for the parties and considering
the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court observes that
the order dated 15.07.2024 under Annexure-5 is not sustainable in
law and therefore, the same is hereby quashed and the matter is
remanded to the Chief Construction Engineer, Rural Works
Circle, Angul (Opposite Party No.3) and looking to the date of
death of the deceased and involving whom the appointment under
the Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme is sought for and the date of
application for appointment under the Rehabilitation Assistance
Scheme, this Court directs that the Chief Construction Engineer,
Rural Works Circle, Angul (Opposite Party No.3) to look into the
claim of the Petitioner and dispose of the same in accordance with
law, taking into account the judgments in the case of Indian Bank
vs. Promila, reported in (2020) 2 SCC 729, State of Madhya
Pradesh vs. Amit Shrivas, reported in (2020) 10 SCC 496,
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of The Secretary to Govt.,
Department of Education (Primary) & Ors. vs. Bheemesh Alias
Bheemappa (Civil Appeal No.7722 of 2021) as well as in the case
of State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Ashish Awasthi, reported in
2021(II) OLR (SC) 1072 and judgment dated 31.10.2023 in
W.P.(C) No.5214 of 2021 and W.P.(C) No.27752 of 2022
reported in 2024 (I) OLR 190 in Biswajit Swain vrs. State of
Odisha, wherein the Apex Court in a clear and categorical term
observed that the policy prevalent at the time of death of the
deceased employee is only to be considered and not the
subsequent policy and pass a speaking and reasoned order by
giving appointment to the Petitioner under the Rehabilitation
Assistance Scheme, subject to availability of vacancies taking into
consideration the notification dtd.04.04.2025, within a period of
three months from the date of production of certified copy of this
order. Decision so taken be communicated to the Petitioner within
a period of two weeks thereafter.
8. With the above observation/direction, the writ petition
stands disposed of.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper
application.
( A.K. Mohapatra )
Judge
S.K. Rout
Digitally Signed Page 4 of 4.
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 17-May-2025 17:50:56
