Orissa High Court
Dr. Sangram Dash vs State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite ... on 18 June, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.16107 of 2025
Dr. Sangram Dash ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
M.pratap @ Pratap
Kumar Mohapatra
-versus-
State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties
Represented By Adv. -
D. Lenka, A.G.A.
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
MOHAPATRA
ORDER
18.06.2025 Order No.
01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).
2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner as well as learned Additional Govt. Advocate appearing for the State- Opposite Parties. Perused the writ application as well as the documents annexed thereto.
3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the following prayer:
"It is, therefore, prayed before the Hon'ble Court to allow the petition, AND
(i) Further be pleased to issue Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writs(s)/direction(s)/ order(s) directing to quash the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) dt.03.08.2024 issued Page 1 of 4. by Joint Secretary to Govt. F & ARD Department
(ii) Further be pleased to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writs(s)/direction(s) / order(s) to direct the OP No.1 to sanction study leave to complete Ph.D Research work at IVRI, Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh as recommended by OP No.2, the Director, Animal Husbandary and Veterinary Services, Odisha, AND
(iii) Further be pleased to pass any other Order(s) Direction(s) as deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that the Petitioner who is working as Veterinary Assistant Surgeon at Kadobahal under CDVO, Bargarh applied for study leave to do his Ph.D Research work at IVRI, Izzatnagar, Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh. The leave application of the Petitioner was taken up by the Director, Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Services, Odisha. Upon due consideration the application of the Petitioner was sent to the Govt. vide letter No.19043 dt.20.12.2024 under Annexure-13 with a specific recommendation by the Director in favour of four persons including the present Petitioner. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at this juncture contended that although the case of the Petitioner has been recommended for grant of study leave, however, no final decision has been taken by the Opposite Party No.1. As a result, the Petitioner is unable to register himself for the Ph.D Research work. Being aggrieved by such inaction on the part of the Opposite Party No.1, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ Page 2 of 4. application.
5. Learned Additional Govt. Advocate on the other hand contended that although he does not have instruction in the matter. However, on perusal of the writ application it appears that the case of the Petitioner has been recommended to the State for grant of his study leave as is evident from the letter under Annexure-13 to the writ application. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the State contended that since the recommendation is pending before the Govt. for consideration, the present writ application is not maintainable. He further submitted that in the event this Court directs the Opposite Party No.1 to consider and to take a decision on the recommendation of the Director under Annexure-13, then he will have no objection to the same.
6. Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, on a careful examination of the background facts as well as materials on record, further keeping in view the limited nature of grievance of the Petitioner, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ application at the stage of admission by directing the Opposite Party No.1 to take a decision on the recommendation of the Director under Annexure-13 keeping in view the Memorandum dated 16.10.2024 under Annexure-11 within a period of two weeks from the date of communication of a certified copy of today's order. The final decision so taken be communicated to the Petitioner as expeditiously as possible preferably within a week from the date of taking such a decision.
7. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the writ Page 3 of 4. application stands disposed of.
8. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.
( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Anil Signature Not Verified Page 4 of 4. Digitally Signed Signed by: ANIL KUMAR SAHOO Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 19-Jun-2025 11:58:29