Sanjay Ku.Mohanty v. State And ORS.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C) No.20443 Of 2012 (Through hybrid mode) Sanjay Kumar Mohanty and another ....

Petitioners Mr. J. R. Dash, Advocate -versusState of Odisha and others ....

Opposite Parties Mr. N. Jena, Advocate (Standing Counsel for S & ME Department) CORAM: JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA

ORDER

11.10.2022 I.A. No.11490 of 2022 8.

1.

Mr. Dash, learned advocate appears on behalf of applicant, who Order No.

was petitioner in the writ petition, since disposed of by order dated 10th May, 2022. He submits, prayer in the application is for enforcing compliance of directions made in said order. Mr. Jena, learned advocate, Standing Counsel for the department submits, he does not have instructions. On query from Court Mr. Dash submits, he does not have information of appeal preferred against said order dated 10th May, 2022.

2.

Clear directions were made in said order dated 10th May, 2022 on reasons given therein. The allegation is that State has not complied.

// 2 // This Bench on having dealt with the writ petition, is functus officio in respect of adjudication thereof. Applicant must find equitable mode of execution, for enforcing the directions.

3.

With above observation the application is disposed of. This will however not prevent applicant from seeking such remedy as may be available in law.

(Arindam Sinha) Judge Prasant