Dusasan Sahoo v. Chief General Manager, Ntpc, Angul

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P (C) No. 21277 of 2022 Dusasan Sahoo & Others .....

Petitioners Mr. D.K. Sahu, Advocate Vs.

Chief General Manager , NTPC, Angul & Others .....

Opposite Parties Mr. N. Sarkar, Advocate (for opp. party no.4)

CORAM:

DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

ORDER

23.11.2022 Order This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

No.

01.

2.

Let a copy of the Writ Petition be served on Mr. N. Sarkar, learned counsel appearing for Opp. Party No.4 in course of the day. Heard learned counsel for the Parties.

4.

The Petitioners have filed the present Writ Petition with the following prayer:- "Under the above facts and circumstances, it is therefore prayed that for the interest of justice this Hon'ble Court would be graciously pleased to issue a Rule NISI calling upon the opposite parties to file show cause as to why not the job facilities providing, to the petitioners, who are land lower in projects affected areas of NTPC, considering their SAPs and further direct the opposite parties to not to change the option of Job as declare earlier in 1999 with in a stipulated time. And if the Opposite Parties fail to file show cause or show insufficient cause the said rule may kindly be made absolute and after hearing direct the Opposite Parties to provide job facilities, to the petitioners, who are land looser in projects affected persons of NTPC considering their SAPs and further direct the opposite parties to not to change the option of job as declare earlier in 1999 within a stipulated time.

And further be pleased to pass such other order/orders direction/directions as deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.

And for this act of kindness, the petitioners as in duty bound shall ever pray."

5.

He further submits that through highlighting their grievances, the petitioners have filed a representation vide Annexure- 6 to the Writ Petition, but till date nothing has been done in the matter. In such background, he prays that a direction be issued to Opposite Party No.1 to take a decision on the above noted petition within a specific time period. 6.

Considering the submissions made and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court directs Opposite Party No.1 to take a decision on the above noted petition in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order and communicate the result of such exercise to the petitioners. 7.

The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. sangita (DR. B.R. SARANGI) JUDGE (B. P. SATAPATHY) JUDGE