Pravat Kumar Barik v. State Of Odisha

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.C(OAC) No.2441 of 2015 Pravat Kumar Barik ....

Petitioner -versusState of Odisha & others ....

Opposite Parties COROM:

JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

ORDER

29.06.2022

1. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode. Order No

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. The Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition with the following prayer.

" This Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to direct the Respondents to consider the case of the applicant for promotion against the posts available under O.S.C.S Cadre upto 3.8.2011 by holding a D.P.C issuing a fresh requisition strictly in compliance of the direction of the Hon'ble Tribunal dated 15.11.2013 in O.A.

No.1872©/2012 and O.A.

No.1873(C)/2012 in favour of those Revenue Supervisors who were eligible as against the vacancies for the year 2010 & 2011 forthwith and grant all consequential service & financial benefits including pensionary benefits retrospectively with arrears.

Further this Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to quash the notification dated 2.7.2014."

4. It is submitted that the petitioner claiming extension of benefit of promotion in accordance with order passed by the Tribunal under Annexure-5 approached the Member, Board of Revenue-Opp. party No.2 under Annexure-7 series. It is

// 2 // submitted that in spite of order passed by this Court while issuing notice of the matter on 16.7.2015, no decision has been taken on such prayer of the petitioner till date.

5. Considering such submission and in view of the fact that no counter has been filed by the State- Opp. parties, this Court dispose of the writ petition with a direction on the Opp. party No.2 to take a lawful decision on the prayer made by the petitioner available at page 42 under Annexure-7 series to the writ petition within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order and by giving a personal hearing to the petitioner. The order so passed by opp. party no.2 be communicated to the petitioner by that time.

6. It is observed that this Court has expressed no opinion on the merit of the case.

7. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge sangita