AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
WP(C) No.6342 of 2023 and I.A. No.2790 of 2023
Mr. Tripathy, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, his client was appointed as executive officer without remuneration, under the scheme. By impugned order dated 25th January, 2023 the Commissioner removed him. He draws attention to sections 42(8), 52, 54, 22 and 28 in Odisha Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1951. He seeks interference.
Mr. Sharma, learned advocate, Additional Government Advocate appears on behalf of State and submits, statutory remedy of appeal is available to petitioner. The writ petition is not maintainable. He, however, prays for adjournment. Ms. Naidu, learned advocate appears on behalf of the Commissioner and also prays for adjournment. Mr. Dash, learned advocate appears and submits, his clients are the sabayats. It is on their complaint impugned order was passed. His clients have not been made parties. He prays for adjournment for his clients to apply to intervene.
We are clear in our mind there is a scheme, pursuant to which petitioner was appointed as executive officer without remuneration. As such, he is not covered by section 52 or 54. We have perused impugned order. It does not disclose any of the reasons given in section 28(1).
Adjournment is granted as peremptory.
List on 10th March, 2023.
There will be stay of operation of impugned order till next date of hearing.
…………………………………