The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.8318 of 2024 Pradosh Kumar Champatiray ..... Petitioner Represented By Adv. - Bhakta Ranjan Barik -versus- 1) State Of Odisha 2) Director Of Agriculture And Food Production 3) Collector And Dist.magistrate 4) Chief District Agriculture Officer, Khurda ..... Opposite Parties Represented By Adv. – D.Mohapatra, ASC
Legal Reasoning
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA Order No.
Decision
ORDER 10.04.2024 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State. Perused the writ petition as well as documents annexed in the Writ Petition. 3. The present Writ Petition has been filed by the Petitioner with the following prayer : “It is therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be graciously pleased to: - i) admit the writ petition; ii) call for the records; iii) issue Rule Nisi calling upon the Opp. Parties as to why the rejection letter dt.06.02.2024 under Annexure-6 shall not be quashed and the application of Petitioner shall not consider for appointment under the prevalent O.C.S (Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules, 1990 within a specified time; iv) if the Opp. Parties do not show cause or show insufficient cause issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions in Page 1 of 4. quashing the rejection letter dt.06.02.2024 under Annexure-6 the Opp. Parties may direct to consider the application of Petitioner the prevalent O.C.S (Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules, 1990 and give appointment within a time to be stipulated by this Hon'ble Court.” It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the for appointment under 4. brother of the petitioner, who was working as a Village Agriculture Worker (V.A.W.) in the District Agriculture office, Khordha died in harness on 12.06.2014 leaving behind his legal heirs including the present Petitioner who happens to be the brother of the deceased govt. employee. Thereafter, the Petitioner applied for a job along with all documents for compassionate appointment under RA scheme of the Govt. by filing an application on 05.06.2015 within a period of limitation described under the OCS (RA) Rules, 1990. He further contended that the Opposite Parties sat over the matter for several years and finally, the application has been rejected on 06.02.2024 by applying the provisions of OCS (RA) Rules, 2020 rules. 5. In course of his argument, learned counsel for the petitioner referred to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Malaya Nanda Sethy vrs. State of Orissa and others : reported in 2022(II) OLR(SC)-1 and State of West Bengal-v.-Debabrata Tiwri passed in Civil Appeal No.8842 of 2022 decided on 3rd of March, 2023 reported in (2023 (3) SCALE-557 decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the judgment of this Court in Suchitra Bal vs. State of Odisha & ors. by a Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No.2081 of 2021 decided on 16.03.2023 as well as Bindusagar Samantaray vs. State of Odisha & ors. by a Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No.810 of 2021 decided on 25.09.2023 and submitted before this Court that taking into consideration the date of death of deceased government employee and the date of application, the application of the Petitioner should have been considered in the OCS Page 2 of 4. (RA) Rules, 1990. Further, referred that the judgment of this Court in the case of Biswajit Swain vs. State of Odisha and others in W.P.(C) No.5214 of 2021 decided on 31.10.2023, wherein this Court has already declared the Rule-6 (9) of the OCS (RA) Rules, 2020 was ultra vires. In such view of the matter, he submitted that the Opposite Parties have committed an illegality by rejecting the application of the Petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground vide under Annexure-6 to the writ application. 6. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State, on the other hand, submits that the application of the Petitioner was considered by the Opposite Party No.2 in terms of the G.A. & P.G. Dept. notification dated 17.02.2020 as well as OCS (RA) Rules, 2020. Further, it is contended that in view of the provisions contained in such rule as well as the resolution of the G.A. & P.G. Dept. notification, all pending applications were to be considered by applying the rules which was in force at the time of such consideration. Therefore, the Opposite Parties have not committed an illegality while rejecting the application, however the writ application is not maintainable at this stage, and hence it should be dismissed. 7. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties as well as materials on record, further taking into consideration this Court is of the considered view that there is no dispute with regard to date of death of the deceased and date of application. It further appears that the Opposite Parties vide order dated 06.02.2024 under Annexure-6 to the writ application have rejected the application of the Petitioner by applying the provisions of new rules of the 2020. In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as well as this Court, this Court is of the considered view that such conduct of the Opposite Parties in rejecting Page 3 of 4. the application of the Petitioner is unsustainable in law. Accordingly, impugned rejecting order dated 6.2.2024 under Annexure-6 and further the matter is remanded back to the Opposite Parties to consider the application of the petitioner afresh in the light of the law laid down of the Hon’ble Supreme Court as well as this Court which are discussed hereinabove and the OCS (RA) Rules, 1990 and dispose of the matter by passing a speaking and reasoned order in accordance with law within a period of two months. Any decision so taken on the same shall be communicated to the petitioner within a period of two weeks thereafter. 8. With the aforesaid observation/direction, the writ petition is disposed of. 9. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. Anil ( A.K. Mohapatra) Judge Signature Not Verified Page 4 of 4. Digitally Signed Signed by: ANIL KUMAR SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 12-Apr-2024 11:15:46