Rajendra Samal v. State of Odisha
Case brief
What is this about?
This writ petition sought direction for fixation of pay and payment of differential arrears. The court directed the respondent authority to consider the petitioner's pending representation in light of cited precedents and mandated payment of dues within four months if the benefit is extended.
What did the court decide?
Petitioner's representation in Annexure-9 to be considered; if benefit extended, dues to be paid within four months.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P.(C) No. 16479 of 2016
1
- 22.08.2019 Heard Mr. S.K. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A.K. Mishra, learned Addl. Government Advocate.
The petitioner has filed this application seeking for a direction to opposite parties no. 1 and 2 for fixation of the pay of the petitioner in the scale of pay of Rs.2200-4000/- from 01.05.1989 and also extend the benefit of the revision of such scale in different pay revision rules of the government and pay the same to the petitioner forthwith and further seeks for a direction to opposite parties to calculate the differential arrears on such fixation of pay of the petitioner in the UGC scale of pay and pay the same within a stipulated period.
Mr. S.K. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the entitlement of the petitioner is not in dispute in view of the fact that similar cases have been considered by this Court as well as the apex Court in State of Orissa v. Mamata Mohanty, (2011) 3 SCC 436; Dr. Siddhartha Kumar Sahu v. State of Orissa passed in OJC No. 5855 of 1998 disposed of on 09.05.2007, which has been affirmed by the apex Court in SLP No. 5587 of 2011 disposed of on 18.02.2011 and thereafter a review application was filed before the apex Court in Review Petition (C) No. 2561 of 2016 which was disposed of on 20.03.2017, the same has also been dismissed. Thereby, the benefit has been extended to
2
Dr. Siddhartha Kumar Sahu and another; in Mohin Mohammad v. State of Orissa passed in W.P.(C) No. 15478 of 2005 disposed of on 04.12.2008, Akshaya Kumar Swain v. State of Orissa passed in OJC No. 9242 of 2000 disposed of on 27.10.2005, Ajaya Kumar Das v. State of Orissa, passed in W.P.(C) No. 15481 of 2005 disposed of on 04.12.2008, against which SLP (C) No. 6648 of 2010 was filed and the same was disposed of 23.04.2012 and against non-compliance thereof Contempt Petition No. 155 of 2014 was filed and the apex Court directed that the benefit admissible to the petitioners therein in terms of the order passed by the apex Court be released in their favour expeditiously but not later than six weeks from today, Smt. Manjushree Pattnaik v. State of Orissa, 2006 (II) OLR 50 and finally in W.P.(C) No. 26214 of 2013 disposed of on 06.01.2015, the petitioner in the said case has also been extended with the benefit. Therefore, similar benefit should be extended to the petitioner by considering the representation in Annexure-9, which is pending for consideration before the authority.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to fixation of pay in the scale of Rs. 2200-4000 from 01.05.1989 with differential arrears.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Petitioner
- respondent
Opposite Party 2
Coram
B.R. Sarangi
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court