Satyaranjan Jati v. State Of Odisha

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C) No.350 of 2022 Satyaranjan Jati ....

Petitioner Mr. S. K. Mishra, Advocate -versusState of Odisha and another ....

Opp. Parties Mr. S. Jena, Standing Counsel S & ME.

CORAM:

JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA Order No.

ORDER

06.01.2022 01.

1.

This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Video Conferencing/Physical Mode).

2.

Heard Mr. S.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. S. Jena, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the School and Mass Education Department.

3.

The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner claiming appointment under Odisha Civil Service (Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme) Rule-1990 after death of his father Late Harekrushna Jati Ex-clerk of Ratan Kundu High School Baharada in the district of Balasore. After the death of aforesaid Harekrushna Jati, his son, the present petitioner, had submitted an application for appointment under the Odisha Civil Service (Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme) Rule-1990.

4.

Learned counsel for the Petitioner draws attention of this Court to order dated 12.09.2016 from the office of the District Education Officer, Balasore to the Director, Secondary Education, Odisha, Bhubaneswar for consideration at his end. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the Petitioner that he has complied with all the

// 2 // requirements to be considered under the aforesaid Rules, 1990 and has also filed the affidavit by other legal heirs. However, Director, Secondary Education, Odisha, Bhubaneswar-Opposite Party No.2 has not taken any decision as of now.

5.

Having heard learned counsel for both the sides, this Court is of the view that there is no meaning in keeping the matter pending, hence, this Court disposes the matter with a direction to the Director, Secondary Education, Odisha, Bhubaneswar-Opposite Party No.2 to take a decision on the Letter No.11787 dated 12.06.2016 written by the District Education Officer, Balasore-Opposite Party No.3 within a period of six weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. It is needless to mention here that if the Petitioner is otherwise found suitable and if the rule permits, the Petitioner shall be given appointment under the Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme. 6.

This Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

7.

With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed of. 8.

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

Jagabandhu ( A.K. Mohapatra) Judge