Disposed

Rabinarayan Patnaik v. Orissa State Housing

Orissa HC22 Aug 2019WP(C)/15918/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition by legal representatives of a deceased employee seeking transfer of cash equivalent of accumulated leaves. The Court disposed of the petition after opposite parties admitted the liability and agreed to pay the legitimate dues within two months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to opposite parties to pay legitimate dues of the deceased employee (Earned Leave and Half Pay Leave cash equivalent) within two months; liberty to approach appropriate forum if dues are not

Rabinarayan Patnaik Vs Orissa State Housing — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Orissa HC (2019)

¶1

W.P.(C) No. 15918 of 2008

¶2

22.08.2019 Heard Mr. R.K. Bose, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Somanath Mishra, learned counsel for opposite party no.2.

¶3

The petitioners, who are the legal representatives of the deceased employee, Dr. Rabinarayan Patnaik has approached this Court by filing this application seeking for a direction to opposite party no.1 to transfer of cash equivalent Earned Leave and Half Pay Leave accumulations at the credit of the deceased employee.

¶4

Mr. R.K. Bose, learned counsel for the petitioners states that the deceased employee, Dr. Rabinarayan Patnaik, who was continuing under opposite party no.1 and discharged his duty, while he was continuing a proceeding was initiated against him. Ultimately, he challenged the said proceeding in W.P.(C) No. 70 of 2014 but during pendency of such writ petition he died. Therefore, the legal representatives of the deceased employee have approached this Court by filing this application seeking for legitimate dues of the deceased employee, which shall be paid by the opposite parties.

¶5

Mr. Somanath Mishra, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 states that by way of filing counter affidavit it is intimated that due to pendency of the departmental proceeding, which has been challenged by the deceased employee in W.P.(C) No. 70 of 2014, the benefit admissible to him has been extended, but after the said writ petition has been withdrawn, whatever due admissible to him, the same shall be paid to the legal representatives of the deceased employee.

¶6

Considering the contention raised by learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, the opposite parties have admitted to pay the legitimate dues of the deceased employee, and had categorically stated in paragraph-6 of the counter affidavit which is as follows :

¶7

“6. That in view of the pendency of the departmental proceeding initiated by the Govt. in H & U.D. Deptt. and the conditions stipulated for resignation of the petitioner and the acceptance of the said conditions by the petitioner, the gratuity, E.L. etc. to be paid to the petitioner have been held up. The same can only be paid to the petitioner following due procedure as per existing Board’s rule which is subject the result of the above mentioned departmental proceeding.”

¶8

In that view of the matter, the relief sought by the petitioner has already been granted by the opposite parties. Let the petitioners approach the opposite party to get legitimate dues of the deceased employee as due and admissible to him, which shall be paid to them in accordance with law forthwith within a period of two months from the date of communication of this order. It is made clear that in the event any due has not been paid to the petitioners, liberty is granted to the petitioners to approach the appropriate forum ventilating their grievance.

¶9

With the above observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶10

Dr. B.R. Sarangi, J.

¶11

Ajaya

Rabinarayan Patnaik v. Orissa State Housing

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rabinarayan Patnaik v. Orissa State Housing

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Swarnalata Pati Vs O.U.a.T.,Bhubaneswar

Basanta Ku.Singh Vs President,Tribal Development Cooperative Corporation of Orissa Ltd.

Reena Thapa Vs State

Prasanna Ku.Pradhan Vs Union of India

Rajendra Samal Vs State of Odisha

Madhumita Mohanty @ Piri Vs State of Odisha