p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.26999 of 2025 Ashwini Kumar Pradhan …. Petitioner Represented by Adv.- Mr. Biplaba P.B. Bahali, Adv. -versus- State of Odisha and others …. Opposite Parties Represented by Adv.- Mr. S.B. Mohanty, AGA CORAM: JUSTICE DIXIT KRISHNA SHRIPAD ORDER 13.10.2025 Petitioner is before this Court to call in question the subject disciplinary proceedings on two grounds: The authority, who instituted the said proceedings, is incompetent in terms of the Government Circular No.15602 dated 06.07.2013 at Page-3 Paragarph-2 and (ii) the criminal proceeding that was structured on the very same fact matrix has been quashed vide Annexure-9. Counsel also submits that when proceeding is constituted by an incompetent authority, in the eye of law it is non-est. In support of that, he presses into service a decision of the Apex Court in State of Tamil Nadu v. Promod Kumar, AIR (2018) SC 4060. 2. Learned AGA appearing for the OPs opposes the petition contending that all contentions can be taken up by the petitioner before the competent authority and therefore, writ petition is misconceived. 3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the petition papers, this Court is of the considered opinion that the subject proceedings are incompetent, inasmuch as in terms of Circular in question Order No. 01. p. 2 the power of disciplinary action against employees of the kind is granted to the District Education Officer and not to the one, who has initiated the subject proceedings. The said paragraph reads as under: “The District Education Officer will be the disciplinary Authority in respect of class-III & IV employees of the District Education Officer & Block Education Office Establishment and teaching & non teaching staff (except gazette) of Govt. Secondary Schools.” The above being said, learned AGA is right in telling that it is for the competent authority to take a decision as to what happened on the criminal side qua the disciplinary proceedings. In the above circumstances, petition is allowed in part; a Writ of Certiorari issues quashing the impugned order No.921 dated 13.05.2025 at Annexutre-4 series. Thus, the petitioner is, for the time being, relieved of disciplinary proceedings in question. However, liberty is reserved to the competent authority to take the decision afresh, if warranted. In that connection, all contentions are kept open. No costs. Web copy of order to be acted upon by all concerned. (Dixit Krishna Shripad) Judge Prasant Designation: Personal Assistant