Gayatri Pattanaik v. State Of Odisha

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

WPC(OA) No. 1311 of 2016 Smt. Gayatri Pattnaik ....

Petitioner -versusState of Odisha & Ors.

....

Opposite Parties

CORAM:

JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

ORDER

20.12.2022

05. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement Order No (Virtual/Physical) Mode.

2. Heard Mr. M. Pratap, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. N.N. Satapathy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Opp. Parties.

3. Even though various prayers have been made in the writ petition, but it is contended by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner is suffering due to non-regularization of her period of service from 12.09.1982 to 10.11.1996.

4. Mr. Pratap, learned counsel for the Petitioner also brought to the notice of this Court the communication issued by the Director, Secondary Education on 26.07.1996 under Annexure-3, wherein the Inspect of Schools was directed to regularize the aforesaid period as per Rules. It is also contended that in spite of such clear direction the Inspector of Schools did not take any action in regularizing the period and the Petitioner in the meantime retired from her service on 30.09.2007. Because of such non-regularization of her service, Petitioner is unable to get the retiral benefits.

// 2 //

5. Having heard learned counsels appearing for the Parties and taking into account the grievance of the Petitioner, Petitioner is permitted to make a detailed representation with regard to regularization of her service within a period of 3 (three) weeks from today. If any such application is filed within the above said period, O.P. No. 3 is directed to take a decision on the claim of the Petitioner with regard to regularization of the period of service from 12.09.1982 to 10.11.1996 within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of such representation. While taking such a decision, O.P. No. 3 shall give a personal hearing to the Petitioner and she will be permitted to place documents in support of her claim for such regularization.

6. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observation and direction.

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Sneha