The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.10895 of 2025 Suresh Chandra Behera ..... Petitioner Represented By Adv. – Dr. Jitendra Kumar Lenka State of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties -versus- Represented By Adv. – Smt. Sasmita Nayak, ASC CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA Order No. ORDER 24.04.2025 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ petition as well as the documents annexed thereto. 3. The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioners with the following prayers:- that your “The Petitioner, therefore, most humbly lordships would be prays graciously pleased to issue a rule NISI calling upon the Opposite Parties to show cause as to why the impugned promotion of Private Opp. Party No.4 to the rank of Joint Director of Fisheries in level-14 of pay Matrix as per notification No. 13032/FARD Page 1 of 7. dated 05/08/2024 at Annexure-16 should not be quashed and as to why the Opp. Party No.-1 should not be directed to give promotion to the petitioner to the rank of Joint Director of Fisheries in level -14 of pay Matrix from the date the said Opp. Party No.4 has got promotion i.e., w.e.f 05/08/2024 and extended all financial and consequential benefits including seniority over O.P No.4 in the rank of Joint Director of Fisheries and sanction and pay the differential arrear salary as due and admissible under law. And issue any other writ/writs or direction/directions as would be necessary in the interest of justice.” 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at this outset, contended that the Petitioner while working as District Fisheries Officer was placed under suspension by the Government w.e.f. 04.03.2015 pursuant to order under Annexure-1. Thereafter, the Petitioner was reinstated in service w.e.f. 24.10.2016 by order of the Director, Fisheries under Annexure-2. A disciplinary proceeding was initiated against the Petitioner vide order dated 27.04.2015. Although a charge memo was served on the Petitioner, however the Petitioner was denied the same. 5.
Legal Reasoning
Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that in course of such disciplinary proceeding an inquiry was conducted by the Inquiry Officer and the Inquiry Officer has exonerated the Petitioner from all charges made against the Petitioner vide his report dated 05.12.2015 under Annexure-5 to the writ petition. The Page 2 of 7. disciplinary authority i.e. the Government, while supplying the copy of the Inquiry Report vide letter dated 16.12.2015, requested the Petitioner to submit a representation. Accordingly, the Petitioner has submitted his representation on 18.12.2015. 6. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at this juncture, further contended that in the meantime a DPC was convened to consider the promotion of the officers from the cadre of District Fisheries Officers to the rank of Deputy Director of Fisheries. Accordingly, as per the recommendation of the DPC, the Opposite Party No.4- Joachim Lakra has given promotion to the post of Deputy Director of Fisheries ignoring the case of the Petitioner. Being aggrieved by such conduct of the Opposite Parties, the Petitioner earlier approached the Odisha Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack by filing
Decision
O.A. No.108(C)/2016. The said O.A. was disposed of by the Tribunal vide order dated 14.11.2017 with a direction to the Opposite Parties to give promotion to the Petitioner from the date his junior, namely, Joachim Lakra got such promotion to the rank of Deputy Director of Fisheries (Group-A, Sr. Branch) with all consequential benefits. He further contended that since the Petitioner did not get further promotion as has been given to his junior Joachim Lakra, the Petitioner again approached the State Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench Cuttack by filing O.A. No.1532(C)/2016. During pendency of the aforesaid Page 3 of 7. O.A., the Tribunal got abolished and, accordingly, the matter was transferred to this Court and renumbered as WPC(OAC) No.1532 of 2016. A coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 21.09.2022 passed in WPC(OAC) No.1532 of 2016, quashed the order of de novo inquiry as directed by the Government with a further direction to take action as provided under Rule-15 of the OCS (CCA) Rules, 1962. Finally, the Petitioner was issued with a show cause notice dated 25.08.2023 indicating therein the proposed minor penalty which the Government intended to impose on the Petitioner with a request to the Petitioner to submit his reply to such show cause. In reply to the aforesaid show cause notice dated 25.08.2023, the Petitioner submitted a reply on 14.09.2023 denying all allegations and requested to drop the proceeding. 7. In the meantime, the Government promoted the Petitioner to the rank of Deputy Director of Fisheries (Group-A, Senior Branch) w.e.f. 19.01.2019 i.e. from the date on which his junior Joachim Lakra got such promotion with all consequential benefits under Annexure-14 to the writ petition. While the matter stood thus, on 03.01.2024 a final gradation list of Deputy Director of Fishers was published for the year 2023. 8. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further drawing attention of this Court to Annexure-16 to the writ petition, Page 4 of 7. submitted that the Opposite Party No.4-Joachim Lakra, who is junior to the Petitioner, has been given further promotion to the post of Joint Director of Fisheries in Level-14 of Pay Matrix w.e.f. 05.08.2024. He further alleged that the Petitioner has been discriminated as his case has not been considered for further promotion to the post of Joint Director of Fisheries while considering the case of his junior. Being aggrieved by such conduct of the Opposite Parties, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition. 9. In course of his argument, learned counsel for the Petitioner referring to the Office Memorandum dated 17th June, 2021 of the G.A. & P.G. Department, Government of Odisha, contended that since the disciplinary proceeding is pending for more than two years, in view of the provisions contained in the Office Memorandum dated 17th June, 2021 of the G.A. & P.G. Department, Government of Odisha, the case of the Petitioner should have been considered and the Petitioner should have been given promotion to the post of Joint Director of Fisheries from the date of his junior i.e. Opposite Party No.4 was given such promotion. 10. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, contended that although he has no instruction in the matter, however it appears that the Petitioner has not approached the Opposite Parties for redressal of his Page 5 of 7. grievance before approaching this Court by filing the present writ petition. He further contended that if the case of the Petitioner is covered by the Office Memorandum dated 17th June, 2021 of the G.A. & P.G. Department, Government of Odisha, then the Opposite Parties be directed to consider the case of the Petitioner subject to the Petitioner satisfying the criteria as laid down in the Office Memorandum dated 17th June, 2021 of the G.A. & P.G. Department, Government of Odisha under Annexure-17 to the writ petition and she will have no objection to the same. 11. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties and on a careful examination of the background facts and further keeping in view the nature of the grievance involved in the present writ petition, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ petition at the stage of admission by granting liberty to the Petitioner to approach the Opposite Party No.1 by filing a detailed representation taking therein all the grounds along with a copy of the Office Memorandum dated 17th June, 2021 of the G.A. & P.G. Department, Government of Odisha within a period of three weeks from today. In such eventuality, the Opposite Party No.1 shall consider the case of the Petitioner strictly in terms of the Office Memorandum dated 17th June, 2021 of the G.A. & P.G. Department, Government of Odisha and dispose of the representation of the Petitioner by passing a speaking and Page 6 of 7. reasoned order. It is made clear that in the event Opposite Party No.1 come to a conclusion that the case of the Petitioner complies the requirement as laid down in the Office Memorandum dated 17th June, 2021 of the G.A. & P.G. Department, Government of Odisha, then necessary follow up orders to be passed by the Opposite Party No.1 within a period of two months from the date of communication of a certified copy of this order. 12. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. Debasis ( A.K. Mohapatra) Judge Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: DEBASIS AECH Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Date: 29-Apr-2025 14:31:23 Page 7 of 7.