Orissa High Court Quarterly Digest: July-September 2022

Nominal Index: 1. State of Odisha & Ors. v. Radhakanta Tripathy & Anr., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 109 2. Gobardhan Gadaba @ Gadava v. State of Odisha, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 110 3. Naba Krishna Mahapatra v. State of Odisha & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 111 4. Kishore Bira v. State of Odisha, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 112 5. M/s. Patel Brothers & Co., Sambalpur v. State of Odisha, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 113 6. Chinta Marandi @ Chintamani Marandi v. State of Orissa, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 114 7. Pradeep Kumar Sethy v. State of Odisha, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 115 8. Rajesh Kumar Agarwal & Ors. v. Regional Director (E), Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Kolkata & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 116 9. Babita Satpathy @ Mishra v. Sitanshu Kumar Dash & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 117 10. Dr. Satya Narayan Bhujabala & Anr. v. Veer Surendra Sai Institute of Medical Science and Research, Burla and Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 118 11. State of Odisha represented by Commissioner of Sales Tax, Cuttack v. M/s. Geetashree Industries & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 119 12. Abhisek Acharya & Ors. v. State of Odisha, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 120 13. Smrutikant Rath & Ors. v. State of Odisha & Anr., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 121 14. Faridabad Gurgaon Minerals v. Orissa Mining Corporation Ltd., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 122 15. Tapan Kumar Pradhan v. State of Odisha, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 123 16. Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. versus State of Odisha and Others, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 124 17. Hansmina Kumari Das & Ors. v. State of Odisha & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 125 18. Nilakantha Tripathy v. State of Odisha & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 126 19. Madhav Soren v. State of Odisha and Others, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 127 20. Birla Institute of Management v. Fiberfill Interiors & Constructions, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 128 21. Narayan Muduli v. State of Odisha & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 129 22. Shakti Singh v. State of Odisha, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 130 23. Pramod Jena & Anr. v. State of Odisha & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 131 24. Ashok Kumar Gedi v. Jyotrimayee Behera & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 132 25. Ashis Kerketta & Anr. v. State of Odisha, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 133 26. Sanjit Kumar Mishra & Ors. v. Ranjit Mishra, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 134 27. Dara Singh @ Rabindra Ku. Pal & Ors. v. State of Odisha, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 135 28. Anugraha Narayan Pattnaik v. State of Odisha & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 136 29. Harekrushna Naik & Ors. v. State of Orissa, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 137 30. Siddhachit Roy v. Rabindra Kumar Mallick, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 138 31. Abhiram Chatria v. State of Odisha & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 139 32. Tukuna @ Tankadhar Swain v. State of Odisha, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 140 33. Mama @ Bidyut Prava Khuntia v. State of Orissa, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 141 34. Gagan Bihari Patra & Ors. v. State of Odisha & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 142 35. M/s. Chemflo Industries Pvt. Ltd. versus M/s. KMC Construction Ltd. and Anr., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 143 36. Dr. Srikant Panda v. State of Odisha & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 144 37. M/s. Jhar Mining Infra Private Limited versus CMD, managing Coalfields Ltd. & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 145 Judgments/Orders Reported During July-September: 1. Human Rights Commission Can Only 'Recommend' Compensation U/S 18 Of Protection Of Human Rights Act: Orissa High Court Case Title: State of Odisha & Ors. v. Radhakanta Tripathy & Anr. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 109 The Orissa High Court held that Section 18 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 empowers Human Rights Commission only to 'recommend' and not to direct compensation. Notably, the Section provides for steps to be taken by the Commission "during and after inquiry". A Single Bench of Justice Arindam Sinha observed, "Section 18 provides for steps during and after inquiry. As aforesaid there was omission by the Commission to conduct inquiry and as such section 18 could not be invoked by it for any of the steps to be taken thereunder. Having said that, the provision only empowers the Commission to recommend." 2. No Legal Mandate That Two Years Must Be Added To Outer Age Limit Determined By 'Ossification Test': Orissa High Court Case Title: Gobardhan Gadaba @ Gadava v. State of Odisha Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 110 The Orissa High Court held that there is no law that two years mandatorily be added to the outer limit of age as determined by 'ossification test'. While rejecting an argument to that effect, a Single Judge Bench of Justice Sashikanta Mishra observed, "…there is no law which mandates that in each and every case two years have to be added to the outer age limit determined by the ossification test. It would rather be prudent for the Court to accept the higher range of the age determined by the ossification report which, in the instant case is 16 years." ...

Orissa High Court Quarterly Digest: July-September 2022

Jyoti Prakash Dutta

Tags