Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2012 DAILYLAW 575 (ORI)

MD.SHAMSUDDIN v. CMD,GRIDCO and ANR.

WP(C)/19594/2012 · 2026-04-16

Biraja Prasanna Satapathy

Writ Petition (Civil)body2012

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page 1 of 2. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No. 19594 of 2012 MD. Shamsuddin ..... Petitioner Mr. S. Mohapatra, Advocate -versus- CMD, GRIDCO & Anr. ..... Opposite Parties Mr. A.K. Mishra, Advocate (Opp. Party No. 1) CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER 16.04.2026 Order No. 05 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. On the oral prayer made by the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner, he is permitted to correct the description of Opp. Party No. 2 by impleading the authorities of TPWODL as Opp. Party No. 2. 3. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the Opp. Parties. 4. Petitioner has filed the present writ petition inter alia with the following prayer:- “The petitioner prays that the Hon'ble Court may be graciously please to admit the writ petition, and issue a Rule NISI calling upon the opposite parties to show cause on a) As to why the opp. parties shall not be directed to pay compensate to the tune of Rs.10,00000/- (ten lakh) to the petitioner for the loss sustained by him and the family members. b) And to any other Order/Orders to which the petitioner is entitled to deem just and proper be passed. Page 2 of 2. c) And if the opp. parties fail to show cause, show insufficient cause, be pleased to make the said RULE absolute by way issuance of a Writ of an appropriate Writ/Writs Order/Orders Direction/Directions, as this Hon'ble Court deem just and proper in the fact and circumstances of the present case. And for this act of kindness the petitioner, shall as in duty bound shall ever pray.” 5. However, taking into account the claim raised in the present Writ Petition, liberty is granted to the Petitioner to make a fresh representation before Opp. Party No. 2 by enclosing all the relevant documents and citations in support of his claim, if any, within a period of three (3) weeks hence. 6. It is observed that if such representation is filed within the aforesaid time period, Opp. Party No. 2 shall do well to take a lawful decision on the same within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of such representation. The order so passed by Opp. Party No. 2 be communicated to the Petitioner. 7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. (BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge Sneha