Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2025 DAILYLAW 4744 (ORI)

SABITRI PANIGRAHI v. ADDITIONAL LABOUR COMMISSIONER,BHUBANESWAR

WP(C)/756/2025 · 2026-01-28

K R Mohapatra, Sanjay Kumar Mishra

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.756 OF 2025 Sabitri Panigrahi …. Petitioner Mr. Akshaya Kumar Nayak, Advocate -versus- Additional Labour Commissioner, Bhubaneswar & ors. … Opposite Parties Mr. Bibekananda Nayak, Additional Government Advocate (for O.P. Nos.1,3 & 4) Mr. Satya Sundar Kanungo, Advocate (for O.P. No.2) CORAM: JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA ORDER Order No. 28.01.2026 02. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard Mr. Nayak, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. Kanungo, learned Counsel for the Opposite Party No.2- Management. 3. Petitioner in this writ petition seeks to assail the Conciliation Failure Report dated 30.11.2024 (Annexure-3) submitted by the Conciliation Officer-cum-Assistant Labour Officer, Malkangiri. 4. Mr. Kanungo, learned Counsel for the Opposite Party No.2-Management submits that on submission of failure report to the appropriate government, the same was referred to learned Labour Court, Jeypore to answer the reference. Accordingly, I.D. Case No.02 of 2025 was registered. 5. On being noticed, the Petitioner appeared and contested the reference before learned Labour Court. In the meantime I.D. Case No.02 of 2025 has been disposed of by an award dated 13.12.2025. Thus, the writ petition has become infructuous. 6. Mr. Nayak, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that if in the meantime the award has been passed by the Labour Court pursuant to the impugned Conciliation Failure Report submitted to the appropriate government, nothing remains to be adjudicated in this writ petition. 7. He therefore submits that the writ petition may be disposed of granting liberty to the Petitioner to avail remedy in accordance with law, if any cause of action still survives. 8. Mr. Kanungo, learned Counsel for the Opposite Party No.2-Management does not have any objection to such submission. 9. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of as infructuous with an observation that the Petitioner if so advised, may avail remedy in accordance with law, if any cause of action still survives. (K.R. Mohapatra) Judge (S.K. Mishra) Banita Judge Designation: SR. STENOGRAPHER