The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C ) No.26469 OF 2024 Rashmi Prava Dhal .... Petitioner Mr. B.K. Behera, Adv. State of Odisha & Others ..... Opp. Parties -versus- Mr. C.K. Pradhan, AGA Mr. B.S. Tripathy-1, Adv.(for O.P. No.6) THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY CORAM:
Decision
ORDER 06.01.2025 Order No.7 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode. 2. Heard Mr. B.K. Behera, learned counsel for the Petitioner, Mr. C.K. Pradhan, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate and Mr. B.S. Tripathy-1, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Opp. Party No.6. 3. This Writ Petition has been filed inter alia challenging order dt.18.10.2024 so passed by Opp. Party No.3 under Anexure-7. Vide the said order, the mutual order of transfer passed by the self-same Opp. Party No.3 on 23.08.2024 under Anexure-5 was cancelled. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that basing on the mutual application submitted by the Petitioner and Opp. Party No.6, both of them were posted in their respective schools vide order dt.23.08.2024 under Annexure-5. In terms of the said order, Petitioner joined in her place of transfer on such mutual ground and the said fact is reflected in office order dt.30.08.2024 of Opp. Party No.5. 4.1. It is contended that while continuing as such in terms of the mutual order of transfer passed on 23.08.2024 under Anneuxre-5, the impugned order was passed by Opp. Party No.3 under Annexure- 7. Vide the said order, the mutual order of transfer passed on 23.08.2024 was cancelled. 4.2. It is contended that since basing on the joint application filed by the Petitioner and Opp. Party No.6, the mutual order of transfer was passed on 23.08.2024 under Annexure-5, the same could not have been cancelled after due implementation of the same with joining of the Petitioner in her place of transfer. It is accordingly contended that the impugned order is not sustainable in the eye of law and requires interference of this Court. It is also contended that by virtue of interim order passed by this Court, Petitioner though is continuing in her place of transfer as on date, but she is not being allowed to discharge her duty. 5. Mr. C.K. Pradhan, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate on the other hand contended that after passing of the mutual order of transfer on 23.08.2024 with its due implementation, when Opp. Party No.6 made an application that she is not interested for such mutual transfer, on consideration of her claim, the impugned order was passed by Opp. Party No.3 under Annexure-7. 6. Mr. B.S. Tripathy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Opp. Party No.6 on the other hand contended that even though pursuant to the joint application filed by the Petitioner and Opp. Party No.6, mutual order of transfer was passed on 23.08.2024 and in terms of the said order, Petitioner and Opp. Party No.6 joined in their respective place, but subsequently because of some practical difficulties, Opp. Party No.6 made an application under Annexure- B/6 to cancel the order of transfer so passed on 23.08.2024. Subsequently, further application was also made by Opp. Party No.6 before the Collector , Jajpur under Annexure-G/6. 6.1. It is contended that on consideration of such claim of Opp. Party No.6, the order of mutual transfer passed on 23.08.2024 was cancelled vide order dt.18.10.2024 under Annexure-7. It is accordingly contended that no illegality or irregularity can be found with regard to the impugned order so passed under Annexure-7. It is however contended that if at all this Court does interfere with the impugned order, interest of Opp. Party No.6 be looked into and she may be given a posting in any nearby school or in the school from which she was put under transfer vis-(cid:224)-vis Petitioner and Opp. Party No.6 can very well be adjusted taking into account the vacancy available in the said school at present without disturbing the Petitioner. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the submission made, this Court finds that basing on the mutual application submitted by Petitioner and Opp. Party No.6, both were placed under transfer vide order dt.23.08.2024 under Annexure-5. As found such order of transfer passed was accepted by both the Petitioner and Opp. Party NO.6 with joining of both of them in their respective place of transfer. But as found, after passing of such mutual order of transfer, Opp. Pary No.6 made various representations before different authority seeking cancellation of the order of transfer so passed on 23.08.2024 and in consideration of the same, the impugned order has been passed. 7.1. It is the view of this Court since such mutual order of transfer was passed under Annexure-5 taking into account the joint application submitted by the Petitioner and Opp. Party No.6, after passing of the order with its due implementation , Opp. Party No.6 is not permitted to retract by making an application to cancel the order of transfer. It is also found that prior to passing of the impugned order, Petitioner was never given an opportunity of hearing and basing on the claim so made by Opp. Party No.6, the impugned order has been passed. 7.2. In view of such material irregularity which is apparent, this Court is inclined to interfere with the impugned order dt.18.10.2024 so passed by Opp. Party No.3 under Annexure-7. While quashing the same, this Court permits the Petitioner to continue in terms of order dt.23.08.2024. 7.3. However, considering the stand taken in the counter affidavit so filed by Opp. Party No.6 and the submissions made, this Court permits Opp. Party No.6 to make a fresh application before Opp. Party No.3 for consideration of her claim for her posting in any school where vacancy is available nearer to her earlier posting or in the same school, where she was earlier continuing if vacancies are available as contended, but without disturbing the Petitioner. Such a fresh decision be taken within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Opp. Party No.6 is permitted to provide a copy of this order before Opp. Party No.3 for compliance. 7.4. Since it is contended by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that on the face of the interim order, Petitioner was not allowed to continue in the school in spite of her joining, Opp. Party No.3 is directed to allow the Petitioner to continue in her place of transfer and regularize the break period of service, if any, in accordance with law. The Writ Petition accordingly stands disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Signature Not Verified sangita Digitally Signed Signed by: SANGITA PATRA Reason: authentication of order Location: high court of orissa, cuttack Date: 10-Jan-2025 11:06:20