[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Gautam Ojha vs State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite ... on 9 March, 2026
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.23670 of 2025
Gautam Ojha ..... Petitioner
Represented by Adv. -
Krishna Chandra Sahu
-versus-
State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties
Represented by Adv. -
Mr. A.Mohanty, A.S.C.
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
MOHAPATRA
ORDER
Order No. 09.03.2026
02. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement
(Virtual /Physical Mode).
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned
Additional Standing Counsel for the State-Opposite Parties.
Perused the writ application as well as the prayer made therein.
3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with
the following prayer:
"It is, therefore, prayed that your Lordships may
be graciously be pleased to allow this writ petition by
directing the Opp.parties for providing appointment of
the petitioner in any of the vacant Class-Ill or Group-C
post under the administrative control of 0pp. party no.3
& 4 under the R.A. Scheme commensurating with his
qualification if necessary by modifying the order of
appointment under Annexure-6 within a stipulated time
period for the interest of justice.
And may further be pleased to pass any other
order(s), direction(s) as deems fit & proper for the
bonafide interest of justice."
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended
that the father of the Petitioner namely late Chintamani Ojha
who was working as Assistant Teacher of Bankpur P.U.P.S.
under BEO, Ranpur in the district of Nayagarh died in harness
on 09.04.2020. He further contended that the Petitioner being
eligible for being appointed as on compassionate ground applied
for appointment against any Group-C/Group-D Post on
16.07.2020. Such application was forwarded on 04.09.2021 to
the Office of the DEO, Nayagarh as per the letter at Annexure-5.
5. While this was the position, the DEO, Nayagarh after due
scrutiny of the application of the Petitioner issued an
appointment order in favour of the Petitioner vide office order
No.10310 dated 20.11.2024, thereby giving appointment to the
Petitioner in the Post of Peon (Group-D category) under the
Office of the BEO, Nuagaon in the District of Nayagarh at
Annexure-6. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submitted
that pursuant to the aforesaid appointment order, the Petitioner
has joined in duty on 20.11.2024. The joining report has also
been duly forwarded to the Office of the DEO, Nayagarh.
6. The grievance of the Petitioner in the present writ
application is that although the Petitioner is eligible to be
appointed against Group-C post of Clerk and as such post are
lying vacant the Opposite Parties are not considered the case of
the Petitioner for appointing him against any such Group-C post.
In the aforesaid context, learned counsel for the Petitioner
referred to the G.A & P.G. Department clarification dated
13.06.2025 and specifically referred to the provision made in
Para-3 of such clarificatory letter. He further submitted that the
aforesaid clarification of G.A & P.G. Department provides for
appointment against Group-C/Group-D against available
vacancy. A copy of such letter has been annexed to the writ
application at Annexure-10. On such ground, learned counsel for
the Petitioner further contended that the Opposite Party No.3
should have considered the case of the Petitioner and the
Petitioner should have appointed against a Group-C Post taking
into consideration his eligibility and qualification.
7. Learned Counsel for the State on the other hand objected
to the prayer made in the present writ application. He further
submitted that appointment of the Petitioner is clearly under the
O.C.S. (R.A) Rules, 2020. Therefore, in the absence of specific
provisions in the rules of the year 2020, the Petitioner could not
have appointed against any Group-C Post. He further submitted
that the Petitioner has not approached the Opposite Parties
before approaching this Court by filing the present writ
application. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the
State further submitted that he will have no objection in the
event this Court grants liberty to the Petitioner to approach the
Opposite Parties for redressal of his grievance in accordance
with law within a stipulated period of time.
8. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned
counsels appearing for the respective parties, on a careful
examination of the background facts as well as the submissions
made by the learned counsels for the respective parties, this
Court deems it proper to dispose of the present writ application
by granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the Opposite
Party No.3 i.e. DEO, Nayagarh by filing a detailed
representation within two weeks from today along with all
supporting documents and taking therein all the grounds. In such
eventuality, the Opposite Party No.3 shall do well to consider
the case of the Petitioner strictly in accordance with law and
applicable rules as well as the letter of the G.A. & P.G.
Department dated 13.06.2025 and dispose of the representation
of the Petitioner by passing a speaking and reasoned order
within eight weeks from the date of communication of a copy of
today's order. The final order so passed be communicated to the
Petitioner within ten days thereafter.
9. With the aforesaid observation, the writ application stands
disposed of.
10. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.
( A.K. Mohapatra )
Judge
Rubi
