Remanded

Bikram Padhan v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC9 Oct 2020WP(C)/25072/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought leave, pension, and G.P.F. benefits under state rules. Relying on Ritanjali Giri regarding compassionate appointment for employees of block grant institutions, the court rejected the respondent's plea based on the Lokanath Behera decision and remitted the matter for consideration of other benefits within four months.

What did the court decide?

Matter remitted to the concerned authority to consider extension of other claimed benefits (leave, pension, G.P.F.) within four months.

Bikram Padhan Vs State of Odisha — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Orissa HC (2020)

¶1

W.P.(C) No.25072 of 2020

¶2

02. 09.10.2020 This matter is taken up through Video

¶3

Conferencing.

¶4

Heard Mr.K. Swain, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.B.Mohanty, learned Standing Counsel for School and Mass Education Department.

¶5

The petitioners have filed this writ application seeking for a direction to the opposite parties to allow the petitioners to avail the leave benefits under the Orissa Education (Leave of Teachers and other Members of the Staff of Aided Educational Institutions) Rules, 1977, retrial and pensionary benefit under the Orissa Aided Educational Institutions’ Employees Retirement Benefit Rules, 1981 and G.P.F. benefit under the Orissa Aided Educational Institutions Employees’ General Provident Funds Rules, 1983, as they are employees of an aided educational institution.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioners have contended that since the petitioners are working in the educational institution receiving block grant, in view of the judgment passed in Ritanjali Giri @ Paul v. State of Odisha (School & M.E. Deptt.) & others , 2016 (I) ILR 1162, wherein this Court has already held that the legal heirs of deceased employees of educational institutions receiving block grant are entitled to get compassionate appointment, pursuant to which the Government of Odisha in the Department of School & Mass Education Department has issued a circular on 01.08.2019 granting benefit of compassionate appointment to the legal heirs of the deceased

¶7

uks

¶8

¶9

employees working in fully aided educational institutions and educational institutions receiving grant-in-aid (New) /block grant, therefore, other benefits as claimed in the writ application should be extended to the petitioners.

¶10

Learned Standing Counsel for School and Mass Education Department contended that in view of law laid down in Ritanjali Giri @ Paul (supra) although benefit of compassionate appointment to the legal heirs of the deceased employees of educational institutions receiving block grant has already been extended by the State Government, pursuant to letter dated 01.08.2019, but so far as other claims as made in this writ application, the petitioners are not entitled to get the same, as because the benefit of Grant-in-Aid Order, 1994 was denied by this Court in State of Odisha v. Sri Lokanath Behera , 2018 (II) OLR 932, which has been confirmed by the apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 7295 of 2019, arising out of SLP(C) No.8343 of 2019, disposed of on 16.09.2019.

¶11

Considering the contentions raised by learned counsel for the parties and after going through the record, this Court is of the considered view that since the benefit of compassionate appointment to the legal heirs of deceased employees of educational institutions receiving block grant has already been extended by the authority, vide circular dated 01.08.2019, therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the matter is remitted back to the authority concerned for consideration with regard to

¶12

¶13

extension of other benefits as claimed in the writ application taking into account the ratio decided in Ritanjali Giri @ Paul (supra) within a period of four months from the date of communication of this order by the petitioners. Needless to mention, if it is found that the petitioners are entitled to get all the benefits, as claimed in the writ application in consonance with the law laid down in Ritanjali Giri @ Paul (supra), the same shall be granted within the time stipulated.

¶14

The writ petition stands disposed of.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioners 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 Notification No.4587 dated 25.3.2020.

¶16

Biswanath Rath, J.

¶17

¶18

Bikram Padhan v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bikram Padhan v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhabagrahi Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Governing Body of Balakrushna Dash Sharma Sanskrit Mahavidyapitham Vs Saswat Mishra

Surendranath Swain Vs Surendra Kumar

Subash Vs State

Sashi Kanta Panda Vs State of Odisha

Bishnu Charan Sahoo Vs State of Odisha