The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.17180 of 2023 Satyabhama Devi Welfare Trust …. Petitioner Mr. G. Mishra, Advocate State of Odisha and Another -versus- …. Opposite Parties Mr. S.K. Samal, AGA Mr. K.K. Swain, Advocate Mr. B. Dash, Advocate Ms. S. Patnaik, Advocate Mr. S.B. Sarangi, Advocate appearing for Intervenor CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
Decision
ORDER 08.04.2024 Order No. 10. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical) Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties. 3. Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition inter alia with the following prayer:- “ Therefore, it is prayed that , the writ petition may be admitted, the records may be called for and after hearing the parties the same may be allowed; TO Quash the order under annexure-5-Series. AND By granting any other relief (s) as found fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case”. // 2 // 4. It is contended that the Petitioner Institution was issued with a show cause by Opposite Party No.22 on 07.01.2023 under Annexure-1. Pursuant to the said show cause, Petitioner also submitted its reply on 14.01.2023 vide Annexure-2. Thereafter the impugned order under Annexure-5 was passed by Opposite Party No.2 vide his order dtd.15.05.2023. 4.1. It is the main contention of the learned counsel for the Petitioner that since the show cause was issued by Opposite Party No.22 and reply thereof was made before him under Annexure-2, Opposite Party No.2 could not have decided the matter and that too without giving due opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner. It is accordingly contended that the impugned order is not sustainable in the eye of law. 5. Learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State along with learned counsels appearing for the Intervenor / private Opposite Parties contended that such an action has been taken in terms of the provisions contained under Para/Clause-11(g) of the Resolution dtd.06.06.2022 so issued by the Government in the Department of Social Security and Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities. Clause/Para-11(g) of the Resolution dtd. 06.06.2022 reads as follows:- “11(g) In case of any dispute in the management of aided Institutions or if the Government receives any serious compliant in the matter of running of the institutions, the Collector of the District shall be the authority to enquire the matter and if necessary shall suspend the management Page 2 of 6 // 3 // and make appropriate alternative arrangement for running of the institution so as to ensure special education of the children with disabilities without any interruption”. 5.1. Learned Addl. Government Advocate appearing for the State and learned counsels appearing for the Intervenor / Opposite Parties accordingly contended that no illegality has been committed by Opposite Party No.2 while passing the impugned order under Annexure-5. 6. This Court taking into account the contentions raised in the writ petition passed the following order on 18.03.2024:- “1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the Petitioner is permitted to implead District Social Security Officer, Khurda as Opp. Party No. 22 in Court today. 3. Considering the nature of dispute involved, this Court directs learned Addl. Govt. Advocate to produce the record showing the direction issued by the Collector-Opp. Party No. 2 to issue the show-cause to the Petitioner, which has been issued by Opp. Party No. 22 under Annexure-1. 4. Learned Addl. Govt. Advocate is further directed to obtain instruction as to how Opp. Party No. 2 took the final decision vide the impugned order under Annexure-5, even though was issued by Opp. Party No. 22. Such instruction be provided to this Court on the next date. the show-cause 5. As requested, list this matter on 8th April, 2024. 6. Interim order passed earlier shall continue till the next date”. 7. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 18.03.2024, learned Addl. Government Advocate after going through the relevant records contended that on the direction issued by the Collector, the show cause under Page 3 of 6 // 4 // Annexure-1 was issued by Opposite Party No.2. Since the show case was issued on the direction of the Collector- Opposite Party No.2, the matter after due appreciation was rejected vide the impugned order under Annexure-5. 8. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and after going through the materials available on record, this Court finds that the show cause under Annexure-1 was issued by Opposite Party No.22 on 07.01.2023 under Annexure-1. In the show cause, nothing has been indicated that such a show cause was issued vide order of the Collector and as it is found that the same was issued by Opposite Party No.22 in his personal capacity. 8.1. As further found, Petitioner on receipt of the show cause submitted his reply under Annexure-2 before Opposite Party No.22. Since the show cause under Annexure-1 was issued by Opposite Party No.22 and the reply was submitted before him, as per the considered view of this Court, the impugned order could not have been passed by the Collector under Annexure-5 and that too without giving due opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner and by issuing a notice in that regard. 8.2. Not only that as provided under Para-11(g) of the Resolution, in case of any dispute in the Management of an aided institutions or if the Government receives any serious compliant in the matter of the running of the Institutions, the Collector of the District shall be the authority to enquire the matter and thereafter if necessary shall suspend the Page 4 of 6 // 5 // management and make appropriate alternative arrangement. 8.3. Nothing has been brought in the record, regarding any such action taken by the Collector in causing an enquiry and on being satisfied, the impugned order at Annexure-5 has been issued. In view of such material irregularity, which is apparent on the face of the impugned order, this Court is inclined to quash the impugned order dtd.15.05.2023 so passed by Opposite Party No.2 under Annexure-5-Series. While quashing the same, this Court permits Opposite Party No.2 to take appropriate action against the Petitioner- Institution, if any complaint has been made against the Petitioner Institution, in terms of the provisions contained under Para-11(g) of the Resolution dtd.06.06.2022 under Annexure-6. 8.4. It is directed that Opposite Party No.2 shall provide copies of the complaints so received against the Petitioner - Institution along with the report of the enquiry in terms of Para-11(g) of the Resolution dtd.06.06.2022 within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of this order. 8.5. Petitioner shall be given six weeks’ time to file his reply to the complaint and the enquiry report so prepared by Opposite Party No.2. After receipt of the reply, Opposite Party No.2 shall take a lawful decision on the same by giving due opportunity of hearing to all concerned including the complainants. Such a decision be taken within a Page 5 of 6 // 6 // period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of the reply. Till a decision is taken by the Collector-Opposite Party No.2 as directed, status quo with regard to the Management of the Institution be maintained by all concerned. 9. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. A free copy of this order be handed over to Mr.S.K.Samal, learned AGA for compliance. Subrat (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBRAT KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 15-Apr-2024 17:29:48 Page 6 of 6