Petitioner challenged denial of retirement and provident fund benefits under Orissa rules. Court granted liberty to submit a representation to the respondent department and directed a decision within three months without adjudicating merits.
Liberty granted to file a representation; respondent directed to decide within three months.
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.14396 of 2020
3. 14.9.2020
Heard Mr. Ray, leaned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Samal, learned Sr. Standing Counsel for the School & Mass Education Department through Video Conferencing Mode.
According to Mr. Ray, the petitioner is an approved employee of an aided educational institution and is receiving Block Grant. However, the authorities are not extending the benefits of the Orissa Education (Leave of Teachers and other Members of the Staff of Aided Educational Institutions) Rules, 1977, the Orissa Aided Educational Institutions Employees Retirement Benefit Rules, 1981 and the Orissa Aided Educational Institutions Employees General Provident Funds Rules, 1983 to such employee receiving Block Grant. In this context, he relies on the decision of this Court in the case of Ritanjali Giri @ Paul v. State of Orissa & others reported in 2016 (I) ILR CUTTACK 1162 . During course of hearing, Mr. Ray submits that liberty may be granted to the petitioner to approach the Secretary to Government, Department of School and Mass Education, Bhubaneswar (opposite party no.1) by way of filing a comprehensive representation. Further, he prays that a direction be given to the said opposite party to dispose of the said representation within a stipulated time period.
Considering the submissions made and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court grants liberty to the petitioner to file a comprehensive representation along with a copy of this order before opposite party no.1 within a period of two weeks through Registered Post. In the event, such a representation is filed along with a copy of this order before the opposite party
Prasant
no.1, the said opposite party is directed to take a decision on the same in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of such representation and communicate the result of such exercise to the petitioner.
The writ application is accordingly disposed of.
Learned counsel for the parties may utilize the soft copy of this order available in the High Court’s Website or print out thereof at par with certified copy in the manner prescribed vide Court’s Notice No.4587 dated 25.3.2020.
..……………………….. Biswajit Mohanty, J.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner, an employee of an aided educational institution receiving Block Grant, is entitled to benefits under relevant Orissa rules.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Ritanjali Giri @ Paul v. State of Orissa & othersReferred¶4
Ritanjali Giri @ Paul v. State of Orissa & others, 2016 (I) ILR CUTTACK 1162 · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Petitioner
Department of School and Mass Education, Bhubaneswar
Biswajit Mohanty
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
