Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2025 DAILYLAW 36741 (ORI)

LB SRINIVAS ACHARY v. STATE OF ODISHA

WP(C)/15038/2025 · 2025-06-13

Aditya Kumar Mohapatra

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.15038 of 2025 LB. Srinivas Achary ..... Petitioner Represented By Adv. - Krishna Chandra Sahu -versus- State Of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties Mr. P.S. Nayak, AGA CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 13.06.2025 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ petition as well as documents annexed thereto. 3. The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner with the following prayers: “It is therefore prayed that the Hon'ble Court be graciously pleased to pass following relief(s):- (i) The Hon'ble Court be pleased to admit & allow this writ petition. (ii) The Hon'ble Court be pleased by directing the Opp.party no.3 to give promotion to the Page 2 of 3. petitioner to the rank of Addl. S.P from the date of his juniors got promotion as per Annexure- 3, 4 & 5 without taking into account the un- communicated adverse remarks in the PAR by granting all consequential service & financial benefits from the date of his juniors & batchmates got such promotion as per Annexure-3 within a time bound period for the interest of justice. (iii) The Hon'ble court be pleased to pass any other order(s) /direction(s) as deems fit & proper for the bonafide interest of justice” 4. In course of hearing, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner may be granted liberty to file a fresh representation ventilating his grievance before the Opposite Party No.1 which may be considered within a stipulated period of time in accordance with law. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate on the other hand submits that he has no objection if liberty is granted to the Petitioner to file a fresh representation before the Opposite Party No.1 and the same is considered and disposed of in accordance with law. 6. In view of the aforesaid limited nature of grievance of the Petitioner, this Court disposes of the writ petition granting liberty to the Petitioner to file a fresh representation before the Opposite Party No.1 ventilating his grievance within a period of two weeks. If such a representation is filed within the time stipulated, the same shall be considered and disposed of by the Opposite Party No.1 within a period of eight weeks from the date of filing representation by passing a speaking and reasoned order. The decision so taken on the Page 3 of 3. same shall be communicated to the Petitioner within a week from the date of taking such a decision. 7. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ petition is disposed of. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. ( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra) Vacation Judge S.K. Rout