Ashok Kumar Panigrahi v. State Of Orissa
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.34997 of 2022 Ashok Kumar Panigrahi ....
Petitioner Mr. Sanjib Mohanty, Advocate -versusState of Odisha and others ....
Opposite Parties Mr. B. Pr. Tripathy, A.G.A
CORAM:
JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA Order No.
ORDER
20.12.2022 01.
1.
This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).
2.
Heard Mr. Sanjib Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. B. Pr. Tripathy, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. Perused the record as well as documents annexed to the writ petition.
3.
The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:
"Under the circumstances, it is humble prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to admit the case and issue notice to the Opp. Parties to file their show cause as to why the case of the petitioner shall not be allowed and after hearing the parties, the case of the petitioner be allowed;
And pass necessary order to set aside the impugned order of transfer so far it relates to the petitioner's in Sl. No.6 vide Annexure-5 dt.16.12.2022," 4.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that by
// 2 // virtue of order dated 28.02.2022 under Annexure-1, the petitioner along with others were promoted to the post of Inspector of Motor Vehicles/Additional Regional Transport Officer/Asst.
Works Engineer under OTES Cadre, Group-A in the Level 12 of the pay matrix under ORSP Rules, 2017 on adhoc basis for a period of one year or till receipt of the recommendation of OPSC whichever is earlier. However, learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that the petitioner was working as an ARTO at Rayagada and he has been transferred from Rayagada to Jajpur vide Notification dated 16.12.2022 under Annexure-5. The various grounds have also been taken by the petitioner in the writ petition on. 5.
Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, submits that the petitioner should have approached the competent authority first and he has been approached this Court by challenging the order of transfer. He further submits that let the petitioner be directed to approach before the Principal Secretary to Government, Department of Commerce and Transport(Transport), Bhubaneswar(Opposite Party No.1) at the first instance and in such view of the matter, a direction may be given to the said Opposite Party to consider the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law within a stipulated period of time.
6.
Considering the aforesaid submissions made by the respective parties and upon conspectus factual background of the case, this Court disposes of the writ petition at the stage of admission with a direction to the petitioner to file a fresh representation highlighting his grievances along with copies of the relevant documents in support of his claim before the Principal Secretary to Government, Department of Commerce and Transport(Transport),
// 3 // Bhubaneswar(Opposite Party No.1) within a period of two weeks from today. In the event such a representation is filed within the aforesaid period, the same shall be considered strictly in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the representation. The same shall be considered and disposed of by passing a speaking and reasoned order within aforesaid time stipulated. Any decision taken on the same shall be communicated to the Petitioner within a period of two week thereafter. 7.
Further, it is directed that till decision is taken on representation of the petitioner as has been directed hereinabove, the order under Annexure-5 shall not be given effect to for a period of six weeks.
8.
With the aforesaid observation/direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.
( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Jagabandhu