9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 1735X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... kar, Mr. S.Ravi Shankar, Mrs. S. Yamunah Nachiar, JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, 1. This appeal is directed against the final judgment and order dated 24.01.2014 passed by the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack in Writ Petition (Civil) No.19550 of 2011 whereby the High Court allowed the writ petition in part and directed the State to treat the respondent (employee) as a regular employee and grant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... part and was, therefore, justified in issuing the direction now impugned in this appeal by the State. 5. The respondent (a retired employee) filed OA No.1513 (C) 2004 in the Tribunal against the appellant (State) and sought certain reliefs in relation to his postretiral benefits, such as gratuity, pension etc. 6. By order dated 11.06.2009, the Tribunal granted some benefits to the respondent bu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the case to the High Court has occasioned because from the perusal of the impugned order, we find that it is an unreasoned order. In other words, the High Court neither discussed the issues arising in the case, nor dealt with any of the submissions urged by the parties and nor assigned any reason as to why it has allowed the writ petition and granted the reliefs to the writ petitioner which were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7) 2 SCC 222, State of U.P. vs. Battan & Ors., (2001) 10 SCC 607, Raj Kishore Jha vs. State of Bihar & Ors., (2003) 11 SCC 519 and State of Orissa vs. Dhaniram Luhar, (2004) 5 SCC 568). 11. The order impugned in this appeal suffers from aforesaid error, because the High Court while passing the impugned order had only issued the writ of mandamus by giving direction to the State to give some relief ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
