STATE OF ODISHA Vs. PITAMBAR MALLICK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. A. Mohanty, the learned Advocate General on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. R.K. Rath, learned senior Advocate appearing for opposite party No. 1. In this writ application, the petitioner has sought to challenge the order dated 23/20.08.2013 passed by the Orissa Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 754 of 2012 under Annexure-1 and also has sought for quashing of the contempt proceeding registered as C.P. No. 229 of 2013.

(2.) Pursuant to the notices being issued in the present matter, the learned counsel for opposite party No. 1 has raised a preliminary issue regarding maintainability of the present writ petition.

(3.) Mr. Rath, learned Senior Advocate appearing for opposite party No. 1, inter alia, has contended that the present contempt proceeding i.e. C.P. No. 229 of 2013 is a proceeding initiated under Section 17 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985. Therefore, appeal thereof lies only to the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Therefore, this Court does not possess the necessary jurisdiction to entertain the present petition.