Surendra Sahu v. State Of Odisha

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.C. (OA) No.1393 of 2015 Surendra Sahu ....

Petitioner Ms. Sobhana Sahu, Proxy Counsel on behalf of Mr. K.C. Sahu, Advocate -versusState of Odisha & Another ....

Opposite Parties Mr. M.K. Khuntia, AGA

CORAM:

JUSTICE M.S. RAMAN Order No.

ORDER

21.06.2022 01.

1.

This matter is taken up through virtual/physical mode. 2.

The Original Application No. 1393 of 2015 was filed before the State Administrative Tribunal, Bhubaneswar. After its abolition, the same has been transferred to this Court which is renumbered as WPC (OA) No. 1393 of 2015.

3.

Heard Ms. Sobhana Sahu, Proxy Counsel on behalf of Mr. Krishna Chandra Sahu, counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. M.K. Khuntia, learned Additional Government Advocate for the Opposite Parties.

4.

The Petitioner serving as an Agriculture Overseer at Kasinagar in the district of Gajapati came up before this Court indicating non-consideration of representation submitted to the Opposite Party No.1 with regard to Promotion to the Post of Assistant Agriculture Officer (Group B).

5.

The Petitioner claims to have requisite qualification for consideration for the aforesaid post in terms of the provision contained in the Odisha Agriculture and Food Production

// 2 // Service (Method of Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2012.

6.

During the course of hearing, it is pointed out that the representation as submitted to the Opposite Party No.1 on 14th November, 2014, has not yet been considered.

7.

At this stage, Mr. M.K. Khuntia, Additional Government Advocate submitted that direction to dispose of the representation, if pending, before the said Opposite Party would serve the purpose.

8.

Considering the submissions made by both the sides, it is directed that on production of certified copy of this order by the Petitioner along with the representation, which is claimed to have been submitted on 14th November, 2014, Opposite Party No.1 shall take a decision within a period of three months from the date of receipt of aforesaid documents and communicate the reasoned order to the petitioner. It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinionon merit of the case.

9.

In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of. Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.

(M.S. Raman) Judge Laxmikant