RUPA MANJARI MAHAPATRA Vs. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY MSME

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition involves the following prayer:

(2.) Principal challenge involving the writ petition appears to be alleged illegal consideration of the case of the petitioner Agenda No.3 (II). Taking this Court to the request of the authority for answering to the queries raised at Annexure-10, Mrs.Jena, learned counsel taking again this Court to Annexure-3 contended that there has been submission of the response to the queries sought for. It is again taking this Court to the recommendation through Annexure-7, Mrs.Jena, learned counsel also attempted to convince the Court that there has been already a recommendation by the competent authority as marked in right-hand column of Sl. No.1 at page-35 of the brief. It is next taking this Court to the discussions on the consideration of the case of the petitioner appearing at page-38 of the brief, petitioner has a serious allegation that when the first part discussion indicates petitioner did not have the response to the queries, in the subsequent paragraph there is abrupt reaching with the conclusion merely stating that even though there is response of the petitioner to the queries at the Online Go-Swift portal but it is simply to mislead the authority. It is in the above background, Mrs.Jena, learned counsel claims there has been mechanical disposal of the issue involved therein.

(3.) Mr.Sahoo, learned Additional Standing Counsel in his opposition to the allegation of the petitioner again on reading of the observation at page-38 of the brief, for the reason assigned therein attempted to satisfy the rejection of the claim of the petitioner.