BISWANTH JENA Vs. LAW DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Palit, learned senior advocate appears on behalf of review applicants. He submits, his clients have good ground for review or modification of judgment dtd. 20/1/2023. Drawing attention to the judgment he submits, it was one thing for this Court to quash subsequent letter dtd. 10/3/2022, issued by the Government, superseding the Trust Board appointed by order dtd. 3/3/2022 but another to restore said appointed Trust Board. He submits, if there was irregularity in his clients being approved by the Government for being appointed, similar irregularity existed and exists in respect of those appointed under said earlier order dtd. 3/3/2022.

(2.) Mr. Bose, learned advocate appears on behalf of writ petitioners. He has not been called upon to answer as also Mr. Sharma, learned advocate, Additional Government Advocate appearing for State and Ms. Naidu, learned advocate for the Commissioner.

(3.) On pain of repetition this Court notes that letter dtd. 20/1/2022 issued by the Government was in reference to Assistant Commissioner's letter dtd. 17/6/2020, being the proposal. By said letter, the Government approved the proposal and accordingly there was appointment order dtd. 3/3/2022. The appointment was for period of two years, made under Sec. 27 in Odisha Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1951. Subsequent thereto, the Government, by since set aside and quashed letter dtd. 10/3/2022, sought to supersede its earlier approval. The set aside and quashed letter does not bear reference to any fresh proposal but, the one on which the Government had already acted by its aforesaid letter dtd. 20/1/2022. As things stand, the Government modified its own stand and not the proposal of the Assistant Commissioner.