Ajit Ranjan Parida vs. State Of Odisha
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER 13.05.2025
This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ petition as well as documents annexed thereto.
The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:
“In the facts and circumstances narrated herein above, it is therefore, most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court be graciously pleased to issue a Rule NISI calling . upon the Opposite Parties to show cause as to:- I. Why direction shall not be given to the Opp Parties, specifically OppParty No.2(i.e. Commissioner of CT & GST, Odisha, Cuttack ) to release the subsistence allowance of the period of suspension of the petitioner, as per Rules- 89 and 90 of the Odisha Service Code forthwith in order to enable the petitioner for his sustenance. II. Why the direction shall not be given to the Opp Parties specifically Opp Party No.2 to reinstate the petitioner in his post immediately, solely on the grounds while the petitioner is under Medical Leave the Opp Party No.2 by holding the petitioner un-authorised leave suspended the petitioner. III. Why Charges framed against the petitioner in the Memorandum (U/Annexure-3) shall not be quashed, solely on the grounds the same is issued in malafide manner with an ill intention by using colourful exercise of power. IV. And pass any other order/orders as would be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.
And if the Opp.Parties fail to show cause or show insufficient cause this Hon'ble court may be pleased to make the Rule absolute and pass such other order/orders as may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner who has been placed under suspension for near about last six month has not been extended with any benefit or allowance. Learned counsel for the petitioner at this juncture contended that such conducts of the Opposite Parties are in contravention of Rules 89 & 90 of the Odisha Service Code. She further submitted that pleading his grievance the petitioner had already approached the Opposite Party No.2 by filing a representation dated 15.04.2025 under Annexure-4 to the writ application. However no decision has been taken on such representation. Being aggrieved by such inaction of the Opposite Party No.2 the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ application. .
Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that she has no specific instruction in the matter, however considering the grievance of the petitioner as involved in the present writ application, she has no objection in the event the Opposite Party No.2 is directed to consider and dispose of the representation of the petitioner under Annexure-4, if the same has not disposed of in the meantime.
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.2 to consider the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-4 within a period of four weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. The Opposite Party No.2 shall do well to dispose of the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-4 by passing a speaking and reasoned order. The decision so taken by the Opposite Party No.2 be also communicated to the Petitioner within ten days thereafter.
With the aforesaid observation/direction, the writ petition is disposed of.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.
( A.K. Mohapatra)
Judge Rubi
Reproduced from the public record of the Orissa High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.