Affected the Right to Livelihood of the Petitioner U/A 21: Orissa HC Reinstates a Physically Handicapped Teacher Who Was Removed After Appointment

Case: Kamalakanta Sahu v. State of Odisha & Ors.

Coram: Justice Sashikanta Mishra

Case No: WPC (OAC) No. 1810 of 2016

Court Observation: “It must be kept in mind that the State is supposed to be a model employer and as such, cannot be allowed to take actions that are arbitrary and not countenanced in law. In the instant case, the Opposite Party-authorities are guilty of approbation and reprobation, i.e. of blowing hot and cold at the same in the manner as described above thereby adversely affecting the right to livelihood of the Petitioner included under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.”

Previous Posts

S.227 CrPC Accused Must Be Discharged In Absence Of Grave Suspicion: Orissa High Court

Pensioners Of Same Rank May Not Form Homogeneous Class; New Benefits Can Be Prospectively Applied: Supreme Court Summarizes Principles On Pension & Cut-Off Dates

No Need for Trial Courts Permission to Renew Passport When Criminal Proceedings Are Stayed By Higher Court: Karnataka HC

A More Than Prima Facie Case Needed To Summon A Person As Accused U/S 319 Cr.P.C.: Uttarakhand High Court Reiterates

Illegitimate Child Also Entitled To Compassionate Appointment: Chhattisgarh High Court

Motor Accident Compensation – Self-Employed Deceased Aged Below 40 Years Entitled To 40% Addition As Future Prospects: Supreme Court Download Judgement

OROP Case: Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation Can’t Be Invoked Based On Minister’s Statement & Parliamentary Committee Report – Supreme Court

FIR & Chargesheet Can Be Quashed If Allegations or Evidence Do Not Establish Commission of an Offence: Delhi High Court

Political Parties Not Bound To Establish Internal Complaints Committee under POSH Act: Kerala High Court

Court Fees Act 1870: Ad Valorem Court-Fees Is Payable on Amount Claimed In a Money Suit for Compensation and Damages: Supreme Court