Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2023 DAILYLAW 690 (ORI)

PUSPANJALI SAHOO v. STATE OF ODISHA

WP(C)/20426/2023 · 2026-03-11

Biraja Prasanna Satapathy

Writ Petition (Civil)body2023

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.20426 of 2023 Puspanjali Sahoo …. Petitioner Mr. P.K. Dash, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. …. Opposite Parties Mr. P.K. Panda, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER 11.03.2026 03. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties. 3. In course of hearing, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that on wrong motion, he made a grievance that he should have been appointed from the date the deceased employee died in the year 2010, though it is not permissible under the OCS (RA) Rules, 1990. 4. However, placing reliance on the aforesaid Rules, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that Petitioner in terms of the said Rules, could not have been appointed on contractual basis vide order dtd. 10.02.2017, and instead he should have been appointed on regular basis. p. 2 p. 2 4.1. It is also contended that Petitioner be given liberty to make a fresh representation with a prayer to extend the benefit of regular appointment from the date such contractual appointment was made, which is not permissible under the aforesaid rules. 5. Learned Addl. Standing Counsel has no serious objection to the course of action proposed. 6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made, this Court while is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order, grants liberty to the Petitioner to make his grievance to get the benefit of regular appointment, from the date he was appointed on contractual basis. 6.1. It is observed that if any such representation will be filed within a period of two(2) weeks hence, Opp. Party No.1 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.1 be communicated to the Petitioner. 7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Subrat