Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2012 DAILYLAW 621 (ORI)

PRANBANDHU ROUT v. STATE and ORS.

WP(C)/691/2012 · 2026-07-01

Biraja Prasanna Satapathy

Writ Petition (Civil)body2012

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.691 of 2012 Pranbandhu Rout …. Petitioner Mr. P.K. Mohapatra, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and Others …. Opposite Parties Mr. C.K. Pradhan, AGA CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER 01.07.2026 03. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. It is contended that the present Writ Petition was filed with a prayer to direct the Opp. Parties to allow the petitioner to continue in the post of Attendant and without preventing him to discharge his duties. 3.1. It is contended that even though an interim order was passed by this Court restraining the Opp. Parties not to dis-engage the petitioner from the post of Attendant but on the face of such order passed on 02.03.2012, petitioner was dis-engaged w.e.f 28.08.2019. 3.2. It is accordingly contended that since there is an interim order restraining the Opp. Parties not to dis- engage and on the face of such interim order, petitioner was dis-engaged w.e.f. 28.08.2019, Opp. Parties be directed to allow the petitioner to continue in his previous engagement. 4. Learned Addl. Govt. Advocate on the other hand contended that since petitioner which is not disputed has been dis-engaged since 28.08.2019 and no such application was ever filed in this present Writ Petition with regard to such dis-engagement, the prayer as made in the Writ Petition cannot be entertained. 5. At this point of time, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that he may be permitted to move Opp. Party No.2 for consideration of his grievance to get the benefit of re-engagement. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the submission made, this Court while disposing the Writ Petition, permits the petitioner to move Opp. Party No.2 by filing an appropriate application for consideration of his grievance to get the benefit of re-engagement. It is observed that if any such application is filed before O.P. No.2 within a period of 3(three) weeks hence, O.P. No.2 shall take a lawful decision on the same within a period of 3(three) months from the date of receipt of such application. 7. The Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Basudev