Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2025 DAILYLAW 66892 (ORI)

KUMUDINI SARDAR v. STATE OF ODISHA

WP(C)/3228/2025 · 2025-04-10

Biraja Prasanna Satapathy

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.3228 of 2025 Kumudini Sardar …. Petitioner Mr. M.K. Sahoo, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and Others …. Opposite Parties Mr. S.K. Jee, AGA CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER 10.04.2025 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner files a memo with a prayer not to press Annexure-5 i.e. the representation filed by the Association. 4. Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition inter alia with the following prayer:- “Under the above facts and circumstances of the case, it is humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue Rule Nisi asking show cause from the Opp. Parties particularly from Opp. Party No.2 as to why, without complying the provisions under Rule 26 & 28 of the Orissa Sub- ordinate Education (Method of Recruitment and Condition of Service) Rules, 1993, the instruction under Annexure-4 series, shall be given effect to and in the event, no show cause or insufficient cause is placed then on hearing the Opp. Parties, the said Rule be made absolute in favour of the petitioner and be pleased to issue appropriate writ/writs or writ of mandamus directing the Opp. Party No.2 to include the name of petitioner as against the ST Category candidates along with by including all eligible ST candidates for consideration for promotion to the post of Sr. SES in respect of ST reservation vacancies in accordance with provisions of the O.S.E. (M.R.C.S.) Rules 1993 within a stipulated time.” 5. Considering the dispute involved, this Court while disposing the Writ Petition, grants liberty to the petitioner to make appropriate grievance before O.P. No.2. It is observed that if any such application is moved before O.P. No.2 within a period of 3 (three) weeks from today, O.P. No.2 shall take a lawful decision on the same, within a further period of 3 (three) months from the date of receipt of such application. 6. The Writ Petition accordingly stands disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Madhusmita