Satahrada Mohapatra v. State Of Odisha

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C) No. 30625 of 2022 Satahrada Mohapatra ....

Petitioner Mr. S. Swain, Advocate -versusState of Odisha and others ....

Opposite Parties Mr. T.K. Pattnaik, ASC

CORAM:

JUSTICE A.K.MOHAPATRA

ORDER

17.11.2022 01.

1.

This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement Order No.

(Virtual/Physical Mode).

2.

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the records. 3.

The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner with the prayer to quash the order dated 17.10.2022 under Annexure-11, so far it relates to the Opposite Party No.6, with a direction to the Opposite Party No.4-Chief District Medical and Public Health Officer, Cuttack to engage her as ANM in C.H.C., Mahanga.

4.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that during the Covid-19 outbreak, the persons like the Petitioner were

// 2 // engaged as ANM at C.H.C., Mahanga in different spells. However, pursuant to the decision taken by the Government, 50% of such ANM engaged on contract basis are continuing on DLR basis. However, the Opposite Party No.4 pursuant to such decision of the Government has appointed Opposite Party No.6 without considering the case of the Petitioner. Being aggrieved in such action of the Opposite Party No.4, the Petitioner has filed detailed representation before the authority as Annexure-12 to the writ petition. It is further submitted that the same is pending for consideration before the Opposite Party No.4.

5.

Learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Opposite Parties submits that since the representation of the Petitioner is pending before the Opposite Party No.4, a direction be given to the authority concerned to consider and dispose of the same in accordance with law within the stipulated period of time. 6.

Considering the submission of the learned counsel for the respective parties and the materials placed before this Court as well as without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, this Court disposes of the writ petition with a direction to the Opposite Party No.4 to consider the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-12 in accordance with law within a period of four weeks

// 3 // from the date of production of certified copy of this order. While disposing of the representation of the Petitioner, it is open to the Opposite Party No.4 to provide an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner as well as Opposite Party No.6 and pass a speaking and reasoned order. Any decision so taken on the said representation shall be communicated to the Petitioner within a period of two weeks thereafter.

7.

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

(A.K. Mohapatra) Judge Debasis