The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.9102 of 2024 Rajanikanta Pani ..... Petitioner Represented By Adv. - Ullash Chandra Mohanty -versus- 1) State Of Odisha 2) Director, Health Services, Odisha 3) Chief Dist Medical Officer, Jagatsinghpur ..... Opposite Parties Represented By Adv. – D.Mohapatra, ASC
Legal Reasoning
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA Order No.
Decision
ORDER 18.04.2024 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-Opposite Parties. 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 : “Under the above facts and circumstances of the case, it is humbly prayed that this Hon'ble High Court be pleased to allow this writ application by granting following reliefs:- (a) A writ of mandamus or an appropriate writ may be issued directing the Opp. Party to give the appointment to the petitioner under Old Rule of the Rehabilitation Assistant Scheme and to quash the order dtd.14.9.2023 of the Opp. Party under Annexure-7. (b) Any other order / orders or direction / directions may be issued so as to give complete relief to the petitioner in the given facts and circumstances of the case as this Hon'ble High Page 1 of 4. court deem fit and proper.” 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the Petitioner that the mother of the present petitioner, who was working under the Govt., died in harness on 03.07.2007. Thereafter, the Petitioner submitted an application for appointment on compassionate ground as one of the legal heirs of the deceased govt. employee. Since no action was taken on such application of the Petitioner, the Petitioner earlier approached the O.A.T. by filing O.A. No.879(C) of 2016 which was disposed of on 15.03.2016 with a direction to the Opposite Party No.1 to consider the application of the time within a period of two months in accordance with law. Despite such direction by the Tribunal, the Opposite Parties rejected the application of the Petitioner which compelled the Petitioner to approach the Tribunal again by filing O.A. No.1325 (C) of 2017. During pendency of the aforesaid O.A., the O.A.T. was abolished and the matter was transferred to this Court and re-registered as WPC(OAC) No.1325 of 2017. A Coordinate Bench of this Court on 20.09.2022 disposed of the said O.A. by directing the Opposite Parties to provide appointment to the Petitioner as against Group-C post (if vacancy is available at present) or as against a Group-D post. The said exercise shall be completed within one month. 5. After disposal of the aforesaid writ application a Coordinate Bench the Petitioner has approached the Opposite Party No.1 by filing a representation on 27.04.2023, the Opposite Party No.3 vide order dated 14.09.2023 under Annexure-7 has rejected the application of the Petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground by applying the OCS (RA) Rules, 2020. Being aggrieved by such order, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ application. 6. 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 Page 2 of 4. 2022(II) OLR(SC)-1 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 the law is well-settled. Taking into consideration the date of death of the deceased and the date of the application, the application should have considered under the OCS (RA) Rules, 1990. However, the Opposite Parties have committed an illegality by rejecting the application of the Petitioner under the OCS (RA) Rules, 2020. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that impugned rejection order under Annexure-7 is unsustainable in law and the same be quashed. 7. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and on careful consideration of the background facts as well as materials on record, this Court observes that the mother of the petitioner died on 03.07.2007 and the application was made much prior to the new rule of the year 2020 came into force. Further, despite direction by a Coordinate Bench on 20.09.2022 in WPC (OAC) No.1325 of 2017 to the Opposite Parties to appoint the Petitioner as against Group-C post (if vacancy is available at present) or as against a Group-D post, the Opposite Parties vide order dated 14.09.2023 under Annexure-7 has rejected the application of the petitioner under the OCS (RA) Rules, 2020. Taking into consideration the judgment referred to hereinabove, this Court is of the considered view that the application of the Petitioner is required to be considered under the OCS (RA) Rules, 2020. Further, taking into consideration the submission made by learned counsel appearing for the State, the Opposite Parties should have also taken into consideration the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of West Bengal-v.- Page 3 of 4. Debabrata Tiwri passed in Civil Appeal No.8842 of 2022 decided on 3rd of March, 2023 reported in (2023 (3) SCALE-557). In such view of the matter, impugned rejection order dated 14.09.2023 under Annexure- 7 is unsustainable in law, accordingly, the same is hereby set aside. Further, the matter is remanded back to the Opposite Party Nos.2 and 3 to consider the matter afresh and grievance of the Petitioner be redressed in accordance with law and by following the OCS (RA) Rules, 1990 as well as the order passed by the Coordinate Bench on 20.09.2022 within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of a copy of this order by passing a speaking and reasoned order. Such final order so passed by the Opposite Party Nos.2 & 3 be also communicated to the Petitioner within two weeks from the date of taking such a decision. 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 Page 4 of 4. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: ANIL KUMAR SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 18-Apr-2024 18:34:08