STATE OF ODISHA Vs. ANIL NAYAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) State is in Intra-Court Appeal calling in question a learned Single Judge's order dtd. 7/2/2023, whereby sole Respondent's WPC (OA) No.155 of 2018 having been favoured, the following relief has been granted in terms of Paragraph-9, which reads as under:

(2.) Learned AGA appearing for the State-Appellants vehemently argues that the impugned order is liable to be voided; inasmuch as, the employee in harness died on 18/9/2012; he has three male children; widow did not choose to claim; the first son being polio struck, has not staked his claim for appointment; only the Respondent being the second son, staked his claim, there being no consent from the side of third son. This aspect having not been adverted to by the learned Single Judge, the impugned order is infected with a grave infirmity. He also draws our attention to Paragraph-8 of the Appeal Memo, wherein it is pleaded that the learned Single Judge allowed the Writ Petition without giving reasonable opportunity of hearing, to the Appellants.

(3.) Mr. Dibyajyoti Nayak, learned counsel appearing for the sole Respondent fervently resists the Appeal contending that the contentions of learned AGA are untrue, if not false; he tells the Court that widow and the first son have not staked claim for appointment respectively on the ground of age and polio; it is only the Respondent, who happens to be the second son, had applied for compassionate appointment; the third son has also given an affidavit signifying his consent for appointment of his client; the Chief District Medical Officer, Puri, vide letter No. 1103 dtd. 6/2/2017 acknowledges the receipt of No Objection Affidavit from the third son of the deceased, original death certificate & Legal Heir Certificate. That being the position, the Appeal should be dismissed with cost, contends he.