The High Court
Case Details
Order No. 01. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.40737 of 2023 Santosh Kumar Behera State of Odisha & another -versus- …. Petitioner Mr.D.K.Panda,Advocate ….
Legal Reasoning
Opposite Parties Mr. P.K.Muduli, A.G.A. CORAM: JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA
Decision
ORDER 15.12.2023 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as the learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. Perused the Writ Petition as well as the documents annexed thereto. 3. The present Writ Petition has been filed with the following prayer : “In view of the facts stated and submissions made above, the Petitioner most humbly prays that the Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other writ/ writs, order/ orders, direction/ directions to quash the order of rejection dated 12.09.2023 issued by the Opp. Party No.2 under ANNEXURE- 10; in favor of And further direct the Opp. Parties to issue appointment order the Petitioner under Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme in a suitable post forthwith following Odisha Civil Services (Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules 1990; And may further be pleased to pass any other order / orders, direction / directions as deemed fit and proper.” It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the 4. father of the petitioner who was working as a Constable, died in harness // 2 // on 21.06.2023. Thereafter, the younger son of the deceased, applied for a job under Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme in the year 2016. However, the authorities stood over the matter for a period of 3 years until 2019, then on 06.06.2019 the opposite party No.2 informed the petitioner that since the mother of the petitioner is alive, the application made by the son of the deceased could not be considered by the authorities in view of the provisions contained in OCS (RA) Rules. Accordingly, the present petitioner, who is the eldest son of the deceased Government employee, made an application on 29.08.2019 along with all supporting documents with regard to his qualifications. While the matter stood thus, the Opposite party No.2 directed the C.D.M.O. Berhampur, to examine the health condition of the mother of the petitioner, namely Sukanti Behera, vide letter dated 23.04.2020. C.D.M.O. Berhampur after examining the mother of the petitioner submitted that she is unfit for any Government job. Accordingly, such report was communicated to the competent authority. However, the Opposite Party No.2 did not act upon such medical report, rather, vide letter dated 24.08.2022, the petitioner was informed that he has secured 32 points upon evaluation under the OCS (RA) Rules, 2020, and therefore, he is found ineligible for appointment upon compassionate grounds. 5. Being aggrieved by such order of rejection, dated 24.08.2022, the petitioner had approached this Court earlier by filing W.P.(C) No.19675 of 2023, which was disposed of by a coordinate bench of this court, vide order dated 24.08.2022, wherein the impugned rejection order was set aside with a further direction to consider the case of the petitioner in the light of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Malaya Nanda Sethy vrs. State of Orissa and others : reported in 2022(II) OLR(SC)-1, State of West Bengal-v.-Debabrata Tiwri reported in (2023 (3) SCALE-557 and pass the necessary orders within a // 3 // stipulated period of time. 6. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, after disposal of the earlier writ application, although the petitioner approached Opposite Party No.2, the Opposite Party No.2 once again rejected the application of the petitioner on the self-same ground which has been taken in the letter dtd.24.08.2022, which was earlier set aside by the coordinate bench in the previous writ application. Being aggrieved by such conduct of the Opposite parties, the petitioner has approached this Court by filling the present writ application. 7. Learned Addl. Government Advocate on the other hand contended that, the Opposite Party has not committed any illegality in rejecting the application of the petitioner vide order dated 12.09.2023. He further contended that, in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in N.C. Santosh’s case and keeping in view the GA Department notification dated 17.02.2020 and 02.03.2021, it was found by the competent authority, i.e. Opposite Party No.2, that the petitioner is ineligible for appointment on compassionate ground. Accordingly, this application for appointment has been rejected by the Opposite Parties. In such view of the matter, learned Addl. Government Advocate submitted that, the opposite parties have not committed any legality in rejecting the application of the petitioner by applying the rules of the year 2020, as the application of the petitioner was being considered while the 2020 rules were in force. 8. Considering the submissions made by learned counsels appearing for the respective parties, and upon a careful examination background facts of the case, this Court observes that, the application of the petitioner has been rejected by applying the rules of the year 2020. In the aforesaid context, this Court would like to further observe that, the very same issue was the subject matter of dispute before this Court in Biswajit Swain vs. State of Odisha and Others in W.P.(C) No.5214 of // 4 // 2021 decided on 31.10.2023. This Court, by a detailed judgment in the above case, has struck down rule 6(9) of the OCS (RA) Rules, 2020, holding the same to be ultra vires of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Moreover, the case of the petitioner, as it appears, is covered by the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Malaya Nanda Sethy vrs. State of Orissa and others; reported in 2022(II) OLR(SC)-1, State of West Bengal-v.-Debabrata Tiwari; reported in (2023 (3) SCALE-557, Suchitra Bal v. State of Odisha and others in W.P.(C) No.2081 of 2021 & batch decided on 27.06.2023, State of Odisha and others vs. Bindu Sagar Samantaray in W.A.No.810 of 2021, and Biswajit Swain vs. State of Odisha and others in W.P.(C) No.5214 of 2021; decided on 31.10.2023. In such view of the matter, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ application at the stage of admission by setting aside the impugned order dated 12.09.2023 under Annexure-10 to the writ application. Further, the matter is remanded back to the Opposite Party No.2 to reconsider the matter in the light of the above observation, as well as the judgments referred to hereinabove, and pass a final order within a period of two months from the date of communication of a certified copy of this order. Any decision so taken, be communicated to the petitioner within two weeks from the date of taking such decision. 9. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the writ application stands disposed of. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Rubi Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: RUBI BEHERA Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 20-Dec-2023 19:50:31