Disposed

Dhuleswar Sasmal v. Orissa Co-Operative

Orissa HC19 Mar 2019WP(C)/315/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking salary and interest for a promotional post. Without adjudicating merits, the court directed the respondent to consider the petitioner's case for promotional benefits before the Committee of Management.

What did the court decide?

Court directed the opposite parties to take steps for the Committee of Management to consider the petitioner's case for promotional benefits.

Dhuleswar Sasmal Vs Orissa Co-Operative — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Orissa HC (2019)

¶1

W.P.(C) No. 315 of 2013

¶2

19.03.2019

¶3

Heard Mr. A. Mishra on behalf of Mr. S. Behera, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.C. Dash, learned counsel for opposite party.

¶4

The petitioner has filed this application seeking direction to the opposite parties to disburse his salary for the post of Manager w.e.f. 19.07.2008 to till date along with the interest @18% per annum by quashing the order dated 13.01.2012 in Annexure-5.

¶5

Mr. A. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that so far as the benefit of the petitioner is concerned, in Annexure-5 while disposing of the representation filed by the petitioner in compliance of the order dated 19.07.2008 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.26818 of 2011, the following order has been passed:

¶6

“………… The representation of Sri Dhuleswar Sasmal has been examined duly in accordance of law. As the promotional order itself is defective and unimplementable, there is no genuineness or legitimacy of Sri D. Sasmal to get salary in the promotional post of Manager though he has submitted his joining in the promotional post. The matter requires to be placed in the next meeting of Committee of Management for detail discussion and final decision. However, he is entitled to get his salary in the post of Deputy Manager.”

¶7

It is contended that though the case of the petitioner requires to be placed in the next meeting of Committee of Management for detail discussion and final decision, the same has not yet been placed before the Committee of Management. Therefore, the grievance of the petitioner has not yet been mitigated by the authority

¶8

concerned.

¶9

Mr. S.C. Dash, learned counsel for opposite party contended that since the order in Annexure-5 passed on 13.01.2012 and in the meantime six years have been passed, he has no instruction whether the matter has been placed before the Committee of Management for detail discussion or not. In any case, if the same has not yet been done, necessary steps would be taken for compliance of the same.

¶10

Considering the contention raised by learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this writ petition stands disposed of directing the opposite parties to take necessary steps for consideration of the case of the petitioner for grant of promotional benefits in the promotional post, which is stated to be placed before the next meeting of the Committee of Management for detail discussion and final decision. If such decision is not taken by the committee of management, the same shall be done as expeditiously as possible.

¶11

Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.

¶12

…………….…………… (DR. B.R. SARANGI) JUDGE

¶13

Ashok

Dhuleswar Sasmal v. Orissa Co-Operative

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhuleswar Sasmal v. Orissa Co-Operative

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

[email protected] Vs Vijaya Kumar

Laxmidhar Mohapatra Vs Board of Governor

Swarnalata Bej Vs Suresh Ku.Satpathy

Sitanath Nayak Vs D.G. of Police

Sushree Pallabhi Vs Hindustan Aeronautic

Anadi Charan Barik Vs State and Ors.