Orissa High Court
Kalpana Nayak vs Prem Chandra Chaudhary on 22 September, 2025
Author: Chittaranjan Dash
Bench: Chittaranjan Dash
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CONTC No.2680 of 2025
Kalpana Nayak .... Petitioner
Ms. S. Pani, Advocate
-versus-
Prem Chandra Chaudhary, .... Opp. Party
Director of Agriculture and
Food Production, Odisha,
Bhubaneswar.
Mr. R.B. Dash, Addl. P.P
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH
ORDER
Order No. 22.09.2025
01. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Parties.
2. By means of this contempt application, the
Petitioner seeks a direction to initiate the contempt
proceeding against the Opposite Party i.e. Prem
Chandra Chaudhary, the Director of Agriculture and
Food Production, Odisha, Bhubaneswar for violation of
the order dated 30.10.2024 passed by this Court in
W.P.(C) No.25468 of 2024.
3. The order passed by this Court under Annexure-1
reads as follows:-
"1. Heard learned counsel for Petitioner and the
State.
2. By means of this writ application, the Petitioner
seeks the intervention of this Court to the effect that
the husband of the Petitioner namely Raj kishore
Naik was engaged as a Peon in the establishment of
the Office of Deputy Director of Agriculture,
Kandhamal, Phulbani.
3. Consequent upon his involvement in a criminal
case connecting the offence U/s. 363/376(1)/506 of
IPC, R/w. Section 4 of Protection of Child from
Sexual Offences Act. In the said case the husband of
the Petitioner was found guilty. For the detaintion in
judicial custody from 23.08.2016 for a period
exceeding 48 hours he was placed under suspension.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the
Petitioner that though the trial court found him
guilty, in the Appeal in CRLA No.479 of 2016 vide
judgment dated 28.07.2022, this Court found the
Petitioner not guilty and directed for his acquittal.
In the mean while the Petitioner was dismissed from
his service under Annexure-5. Subsequent to the
acquittal, therefore, the Petitioner moved the
authority for a review of the order of dismissal but
before consideration of his representation he
expired on 11.12.2023. After the death her husband,
the Petitioner though moved a representation before
the authority claiming the benefit in favour of her
husband to be extended to her, the authority has
paid a deaf ear to it and has not acted upon such
representation as yet.
5. In view of such submission of learned counsel
for the Petitioner, it is directed that the
representation of the Petitioner be considered by the
Director Agriculture & Food Production, Odisha,
Bhubaneswar, i.e. Opposite Party No.3 within three
months from the date of filing of the certified copy of
the order and shall communicate the result of the
representation within a period of two weeks
thereafter.
6. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of."
4. Upon passing of the said order by this Court, the
Petitioner sent a representation to the concerned
authority i.e. the Opposite Party on 11.11.2024 through
Registered post but the same has not yet been complied.
5. The learned counsel for the State submitted that
the Opposite Party has prayed for some time for
compliance of the order through his letter No.23400
dated 15.07.2025. However, the learned counsel for the
State is directed to take further instruction if by this
time, the order has been complied.
6. List this matter on 17.10.2025.
(Chittaranjan Dash)
Judge
Bijay
