GAYADHAR PATI Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present writ petition at the instance of the petitioner, claiming himself to be a social worker, challenges the impugned order copy whereof is Annexure -4. For better appreciation, Annexure -4 is quoted herein below :

(2.) IT is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the Inspector of Schools, Bhadrak, has got no jurisdiction to recall his own order and to permit a retired person to continue and such exercise of jurisdiction is irregular and illegal and moreover, it is not bonafide. In support of his contention, the learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn our attention to the decision of the Apex Court reported in AIR 1995 Supreme Court, 1349 : Union of India and Ors. v. Kantilal Hemantram Pandya, which considered failure of employee to mention alleged correct birth date in option forms declaring his date of birth and while filing provident fund withdrawal - Representation for correction made three decades after joining service - Correctness and genuineness of certificate produced was not free from doubt - Unexplained and inordinate delay in filing application, and it was held that in such circumstances, the applicant -employee would not be entitled to relief.