A writ petition is maintainable to enforce order made in a previous writ petition

The Single Judge Bench of the Orissa High Court, comprising Justice Arindam Sinha in the case of Gourahari Lenka v. State of Odisha and others has expounded that a writ petition can be maintainable to enforce order made in a previous writ petition.

Submission of the petitioner

The Counsel on the behalf of the Petitioner has submitted that his client was included as a beneficiary in the housing scheme. The information obtained from the website was downloaded on 20th May, 2020. He refers to order dated 22nd June, 2021 of co-ordinate Bench made in his client’s earlier writ petition no.16682 of 2021.

Submission of the Respondent

The Additional Advocate General appears on behalf of State and relies upon impugned order and submitted that portal on the housing scheme has since been closed.

 

Reasoning and Decision of the Court

The Court heard both the parties and observed that it cannot be disputed that petitioner’s name was included as a beneficiary and the information was duly obtained by petitioner on 20th May, 2020. Furthermore, there was clear direction by coordinate Bench to arrest action of altering the beneficiaries list.

On the Respondent’s submission, the Court averred that there is no question here of adding petitioner’s name and, therefore, the portal being closed at present time has no bearing on the controversy. 

 

The Court has taken view decided in the case of Indrapuri Studio v. State of West Bengal that a writ petition is maintainable to enforce order made in a previous writ petition.

Considering all the facts available on record, the Court held that the administration not having taken resort to law, of preferring appeal against it, said order has become final and direction made upon the authority, binding. Impugned order is set aside and quashed. Opposite party no.2 is directed to forthwith cause benefit under the scheme be extended to petitioner. The process must commence on action taken within four weeks of communication.

Case Details

 

Case:- S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19434/2022

Petitioner:-  Gourahari Lenka

Respondent:- State of Odisha and others

 

Counsel for the Petitioner - Mr. Subhransu Bhusan Mohanty

Counsel for the Respondent -  Ms. Suman Pattanayak

Judge: Justice Arindam Sinha

 

 

Social media is bold. 

Social media is young.

Social media raises questions.

 Social media is not satisfied with an answer.

Social media looks at the big picture.

 Social media is interested in every detail.

social media is curious.

 Social media is free.

Social media is irreplaceable.

But never irrelevant.

Social media is you.

(With input from news agency language) 

 If you like this story, share it with a friend!   We are a non-profit organization. Help us financially to keep our journalism free from government and corporate pressure.