SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

ORISSA HIGH COURT
HEMALATA NAIK – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF ODISHA – Respondent


Advocates:
['M/S AMITAV DAS', '', 'H K MAHALI', 'P K SAHOO']

2 13.12.2018

Heard Mr. A. Das, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Mr. B. Senapati, learned Additional

Government Advocate .

The petitioner has filed the writ petition to quash

the advertisement No.637/2018 dated 20.11.2018

issued by opposite party no.5-CDPO, Kashipur,

Kashipur ICDS Project for engagement of Anganwadi

Worker in respect of Siadimal Anganwadi Centre.

Mr. A. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner

contended that the petitioner has preferred appeal

bearing Anganwadi Appeal No.1 of 2018 before the

Additional District Magistrate, Rayagada which is

pending for consideration. When the matter is

subjudiced before the learned Additional District

Magistrate, Rayagada and the matter was adjourned to

07.12.2018 on which date due non-availability of

CDPO, Kashipur, it has been posted to 18.12.2019 for

hearing, the CDPO, Kashipur has issued fresh

advertisement for filling up the vacancy of Anganwadi

Worker in respect of Siadimal Anganwadi Centre. He

further contended that when the matter is subjudiced

before the appellate authority, issuance of fresh

advertisement

by

the

CDPO,

Kashipur

causes

prejudice to the petitioner.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top