Susama Panda v. State Of Odisha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P. (C) No. 3929 of 2022 Susama Panda ....
Petitioner Mr. Umesh Chandra Mohanty, Advocate -versusState of Odisha & others ....
Opp. Parties Mr. Rajesh Tripathy, ASC
CORAM:
JUSTICE M.S. SAHOO Order No.
ORDER
10.03.2022 01.
1.
This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
RJ It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is aggrieved by the non-consideration of the proposal forwarded by the Principal-cum-Secretary of the Managing Committee of the opposite party no.3-institution to the appropriate authority, the Director, Higher Education. 2.
It is submitted that the acknowledgement of receiving of the proposal, is indicated in the receipt as at Annexure-8 series to the writ petition. The proposal was for sanction of block grant/grant-in-aid as per the applicable Grant-in-Aid order. It is submitted that the petitioner got appointment under the Managing Committee as per the appointment order Reference No.2/189(A) dated 15.07.2007 (Annexure-1 series) as a lecturer in Sanskrit. Thereafter, the petitioner joined in the said institution on 15.07.2007. The institution was notified as aided educational institution to receive the block grant in terms of the provisions of para-16 of the Grant-in-Aid Order, 2008 as per the Notification dated 29th November, 2012 issued by the opposite party no.1-Government of Odisha, Department of Higher Education (Annexure-3).
3.
It is submitted that the difficulty of the petitioner has
// 2 // been accentuated by the fact that the matter has not proceeded further after the proposal was received as indicated in Annexure-8 by the opposite party no.2- authority. It is submitted that the authority may be directed to consider the proposal, if pending as on date and pass appropriate order in accordance with law.
4.
It is submitted by the learned Addl. Standing Counsel that if any proposal is pending for consideration by the authority, same shall be considered in accordance with law and necessary orders shall be passed in due time.
5.
Considering the nature of grievances raised in the writ petition as well as submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission without issuing notice to opposite party no.3 with the following order:- The authority shall do well to consider any pending proposal as indicated in Annexure-8/similar proposal if pending, in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of communication of this order along with all the relevant documents sought to be relied upon by the petitioner. It is further observed that if the authorities pass a positive order for granting any benefit to the petitioner, the necessary follow-up action shall be taken in accordance with law. 6.
It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion regarding merits of the case, in any manner whatsoever. Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.
Copy of the order be uploaded.
(M.S. Sahoo) Judge