The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WA No.2766 of 2024 State of Odisha and others … Appellants Ms. Aishwarya Dash, ASC Bhabani Sankar Das -Versus- … Respondent None CORAM: THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN Order No.
Decision
ORDER 01.05.2025 01. WA No.2766 of 2024 & I.A. No.7247 of 2024 The matter is taken up through Hybrid mode. 2. The Interlocutory Application has been filed seeking condonation of delay of 274 days in filing the instant writ appeal, which is directed against Order dated 04.12.2023 passed by the learned Single Bench in W.P.(C) No.38501 of 2023, wherein the issue raised was whether the respondent is entitled to be considered for compassionate appointment under the Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme in terms of new Rules, i.e., the Odisha Civil Services (Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules, 2020 by virtue of which the Odisha Civil Services (Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules, 1990 stood repealed. 3. In course of hearing learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the appellants conceded that in view of amendment of Rule 6(9) being carried out in the Odisha Civil Services (Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules, 2020, vide General Administration & Public Grievance Department Notification dated 4th April, 2025, the issue raised in the writ appeal has already been Page 1 of 6 addressed to by the Government of Odisha. Therefore, she insisted for considering issue notice to the respondent for deciding the issue on merit, by condoning the delay in preferring the intra-Court appeal. 4. This Court does not accede to such submission of learned Additional Standing Counsel inasmuch as the death of Government employee while in service occurred on 05.04.2010 and the mother of the petitioner being declared unfit for undertaking Government employment on 01.01.2014, the respondent-son was instructed to appear in qualifying test on 10.01.2016 in which he came out successful. Thereafter, instead of considering the application of the respondent as per the Odisha Civil Services (Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules, 1990, he was asked to submit fresh application under the Odisha Civil Services (Rehabilitation Assistance) Amendment Rules, 2016. The learned Single Bench recording such fact held that the case of the petitioner fell within the scope and ambit of the Odisha Civil Services (Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules, 1990, but not under the Odisha Civil Services (Rehabilitation Assistance) Amendment Rules, 2016 as the death of the father of the respondent took place in the year 2010. It is not the case of the appellants that such amendment Rules, 2016 is given retrospective effect. It is directed by the learned Single Bench that the appellants are required to consider the appointment of the respondent in the light of ratio of decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Malaya Nanda Sethy Vrs. State of Orissa and others, 2022 (II) OLR (SC) 1 = (2022) 4 SCR 707 = 2022 INSC 617; and State of West Bengal Vrs. Debabrata Tiwari, (2023) 3 SCALE 557 = (2023) 2 SCR 611 = 2023 INSC 202; and this Court in Suchitra Bal Vrs. State of Odisha, in W.P.(C) No.2081 of 2021 Page 2 of 6 & batch, disposed of on 27.06.2023 and State of Odisha and others Vrs. Bindusagar Samantaray, in W.A. No.810 of 2021, disposed of on 25.09.2023. 5. Ms. Aishwarya Dash, learned Additional Standing Counsel brought to the notice of this Court that no notice has yet been issued to the sole respondent in the present matter. Howsoever the matter be, Rule 9(6) of the Odisha Civil Services (Rehabilitation Assistances) Rules, 2020 being declared ultra vires by this Court in Biswajit Swain Vrs. State of Odisha, W.P.(C) No.5214 of 2021 vide Judgment dated 31.10.2023, the matter is carried to Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and now sub judice. Nonetheless, during pendency of matter challenging said Judgment before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the Odisha Civil Services (Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules, 2020 has suffered an amendment in 2025 called as “Odisha Civil Services (Rehabilitation Assistance) Amendment Rules, 2025” by virtue of which, said Rule 9(6) has been substituted. Said Amendment Rules is reproduced hereunder: “No.11771-GAD-SC-RAS-0033/2024/Gen.— In exercise of the powers conferred by the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India, the Governor of Odisha is pleased to make the following rules further to amend (Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules, 2020, namely; the Odisha Civil Services 1. Short title and commencement.— (1) (2) These rules may be called the Odisha Civil Services (Rehabilitation Assistance) Amendment Rules, 2025. They shall come into force on the date of their publication in the Odisha Gazette. Page 3 of 6 2. In the Odisha Civil Services (Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules, 2020 (hereinafter referred to as the “said Rules”), in Rule 6,— (i) for sub-rule (9), the following sub-rule shall be substituted, namely: “(9) (a) to All pending applications, relating to death of the date of Government employee prior the Odisha Civil Services commencement of (Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules, 2020 shall be dealt in accordance with the rules prevailing on the date of death of Government employee for appointment under Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme: Service Provided that in case the death of Government employee occurred on or after commencement of (Rehabilitation the Odisha Civil Assistance) Amendment Rules, 2016 and before commencement of the Odisha Civil Services (Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules, 2020, shall be governed by the provisions of the Odisha Civil Service (Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules, 1990. (b) In case the death of Government employee occurred prior to commencement of the Odisha Civil Service (Rehabilitation Assistance) Amendment Rules, 2016, shall be dealt on the basis of distress certificate available in the existing or original application as per the Odisha Civil Service (Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules, 1990. (c) In case the death of Government employee occurred on or after commencement of the Odisha Civil Service (Rehabilitation Assistance) Amendment Rules, 2016 and before commencement of the Odisha Civil Services (Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules, 2020, the appointing authority shall ascertain Page 4 of 6 the present financial distress of the family by calling for a report from Collector of the district in which the family ordinarily resides, as to whether the family is in financial distress as per the provisions of rule 8 of the Odisha Civil Service (Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules, 1990. Explanation for the distress certificate prescribed under clause (c).— The total annual family income from all sources excluding Family pension and temporary increase must not exceed Rs.1,91,000/- (Rupees One Lakh and Ninety-One Thousand) for a family to be in a „distress condition‟.” (ii) The sub-rule (10) shall be omitted.” 6. In view of aforesaid amendment, issuing notice to the respondent for consideration of condonation of delay in filing writ appeal would be futile and such a course shall put the respondent in inconvenience whose family has been pursuing for succour since 2010, particularly when it is not disputed that the respondent has come out successful in the test held in the year 2016. 7. Reference may also be had to a decision rendered in the case of State of Odisha and others vs. Pradeep Kumar Sahu, WA No.1179 of 2024, disposed of by Judgment dated 30.04.2025, wherein taking cognizance of the Odisha Civil Services (Rehabilitation Assistance) Amendment Rules, 2025 this Court declined to interfere with the direction of the learned Single Bench in similar facts and circumstances as obtained in the present case. 8. In the wake of aforesaid discussions, upon examining the explanation furnished in the petition for condonation of delay as to the reason for delay between 04.12.2023 (date of passing order in Page 5 of 6 writ petition) and opinion of the Law Department rendered on 27.05.2024. No explanation whatsoever is available on the record as to the delay caused between 27.05.2024 till 09.08.2024 when proposal to file writ appeal was placed before the learned Advocate General. Furthermore, it is inconceivable that after said proposal, it took another four months till 04.12.2023 (date of filing of writ appeal before this Court) and for such delay there is no reason assigned. There being no sufficient or plausible reason ascribed for the delay, this Court is not inclined to show indulgence to condone the inordinate delay. 9. In the result, the interlocutory application for condonation of delay being dismissed, consequently the writ appeal is also dismissed. All the pending interlocutory applications pending, if any, shall also stand dismissed. Chief Justice (Harish Tandon) Judge MRS/Laxmikant (M.S. Raman) Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: LAXMIKANT MOHAPATRA Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 07-May-2025 10:56:17 Page 6 of 6