Harmohan Maharatha v. State Of Odisha

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

WPC (OA) No. 1064 of 2019 Haramohan Maharatha .....

Petitioner Mr. T.K. Biswal, Advocate Vs.

State of Odisha and others .....

Opposite parties State Counsel

CORAM:

DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI

ORDER

10.10.2022 Order No.

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2.

Heard.

3.

The Petitioner has filed this Writ Petition seeking direction to the opposite parties to grant the benefit of TBA as per ORSP Rules, 1998, ACP as er ORSP Rules, 2008 and RACP in accordance with the Resolution dated 06.02.2013 and 17.01.2015 of Finance Department within a stipulated time along with interest.

4.

In course of hearing, learned counsel for the Petitioner states that highlighting the grievances, the Petitioner has made a representation to Opposite Party No.1 vide Annexure-4 and the same may be directed to be considered within a stipulated time, to which learned Counsel for the State has no objection.

5.

As agreed to by learned Counsel for the parties, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, disposes of the Writ Petition directing Opposite Party No.1 to consider the representation filed by the Petitioner vide Annexure-4, and pass appropriate order in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy this order.

6.

Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.

Arun (DR. B.R. SARANGI, J.)