Orissa High Court Weekly Round-Up: 5 December-11 December, 2022

Nominal Index: 1. Bijaya Manjari Satpathy v. State of Orissa & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 158 2. Project Officer, Bharatpur Open Cast Project of Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd. v. Darsani Kumar Sahoo & Anr., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 159 3. Kalandi Charan Barik v. State of Odisha & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 160 4. JB v. State of Odisha & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 161 5. Manoj Kumar Agarwal v. State of Odisha, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 162 Cases Reported in the Week: · [S. 138 NI Act] Person In Charge Of Trust Can't Be Arraigned As Accused Without Impleading The Trust Itself: Orissa High Court Case Title: Bijaya Manjari Satpathy v. State of Orissa & Ors. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 158 A Single Judge Bench of Justice Gourishankar Satapathy held that a person in charge of a 'Trust' cannot be impleaded as an accused for dishonour of cheque, punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, if the 'Trust' itself is not arraigned as a party as per the mandate of Section 141 of the Act. Section 141 prescribes liabilities of companies for dishonour of cheques. · Writ Of Certiorari Can't Be Issued To Examine Adequacy Of Evidence Adduced Before Lower Court/Tribunal: Orissa High Court Reiterates Case Title: Project Officer, Bharatpur Open Cast Project of Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd. v. Darsani Kumar Sahoo & Anr. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 159 A Division Bench of Justices Arindam Sinha and Sanjay Kumar Mishra clarified that a proceeding cannot be drawn for issuance of the writ of certiorari merely to challenge a finding of fact recorded by a Lower Court/Tribunal, on the ground that the material evidence adduced before the forum was 'insufficient' to sustain the finding. While placing reliance on the ruling of the Supreme Court in Syed Yakoob v. Radhakrishnan, the Court noted: "…a writ of Certiorari can be issued if it is shown that in recording the said finding, the Tribunal had erroneously refused to admit admissible and material evidence, or had erroneously admitted inadmissible evidence, which has influenced the impugned finding. Similarly, if a finding of fact is based on no evidence, that would be regarded as an error of law, which can be corrected by a writ of Certiorari. The Court went on to say further that a finding of fact recorded by the Tribunal cannot be challenged in proceedings for a writ of Certiorari on the ground that the relevant and material evidence adduced before the Tribunal was insufficient or inadequate to sustain the impugned finding." · Merit List Not A Reservoir For Future Appointments: Orissa High Court Dismisses Plea Filed With 15 Yrs Delay Case Title: Kalandi Charan Barik v. State of Odisha & Ors. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 160 A Single Judge Bench of Justice Sangam Kumar Sahoo held that a 'select/merit list' cannot be deemed to be a 'reservoir' for the purpose of appointments. While denying appointment to a candidate who approached the Court, 15 years after publication of the select list, the Court placed reliance on the following observations made by the Supreme Court in State of Orissa & Anr. v. Rajkishore Nanda & Ors.: "A select list cannot be treated as a reservoir for the purpose of appointments, that vacancy can be filled up taking the names from that list as and when it is so required. It is the settled legal proposition that no relief can be granted to the candidate if he approaches the Court after expiry of the select list. If the selection process is over, select list has expired and appointments had been made, no relief can be granted by the Court at a belated stage." · "Institutional Lethargy Has Crept Into Police Stations": Orissa High Court Issues Guidelines For Compulsory Registration Of FIRs Case Title: JB v. State of Odisha & Ors. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 161 A Single Judge Bench of Dr. Justice Sanjeeb Kumar Panigrahi issued a slew of instructions/guidelines to the Director General of Police, Odisha (DGP) for compulsory registration of First Information Reports (FIRs), requiring him to forward the same to all the police stations of the State. Expressing disappointment over frequent cases of non-registration of FIRs by police officers, the Court issued the following six instructions: "a) Whenever a person comes to the Police Station with a complaint, the Officer posted at the Police Station shall compulsorily receive the complaint and endorse the complaint by way of a receipt or by way of stamp acknowledging the said receipt at that Police Station with time and date. The Police Officer shall further insist a photo copy of the said complaint to be given back to the complainant. b) While a prescribed format is not necessary, it is essential that the In-charge of the Police Station shall indicate the minimum information required to substantiate a complaint and shall suggest what...

Orissa High Court Weekly Round-Up: 5 December-11 December, 2022

Jyoti Prakash Dutta

Tags