Disposed

Bipin Bihari Mohanta v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC17 Nov 2020WP(C)/30801/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of this writ petition by refusing immediate entertainment. Instead, it directed the authorities to consider the petitioner's representation and applicable precedents within one and a half months, with provisions for arrear calculation and a 7% penalty interest for delays.

What did the court decide?

Directive to opposite party no.1 to consider representation and decide within one and half months, with consequential interest for delay.

Bipin Bihari Mohanta Vs State of Odisha — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Orissa HC (2020)

¶1

W.P.(C) No.30801 of 2020

¶2

2. 17.11.2020 This matter is taken up through Video Conferencing.

¶3

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶4

This writ petition involves the following

¶5

prayer:

¶6

“Under the above circumstances, it is humbly prayed that the writ application be allowed;

¶7

And

¶8

a) a writ of mandamus or an appropriate writ be issued commanding the O.Ps. to allow the petitioner to avail the benefit of G.P.F. under the old Rules so also a further declaration be made that he is covered by the Orissa Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1992 prior to its amendment by taking into account their initial date of appointment keeping in view the decisions held by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Harbans Lal v. The State of Punjab and Ors., (CWP No.2371 of 2010, decided on 31.8.2010), which has been upheld by the Hon’ble Apex Court in SLP(C) No.23578 of 2012 (SLP(C)….CC No.17901 of 2011) disposed of on 30.07.2012 (State of Punjab and Ors. Vs. Harbans Lal) and also in the case of Jeewan Lata v. State of Punjab and others, (CWP No.10238 of 2017) (O&M), decided on 10.05.2019) with all consequential benefits;

¶9

And

¶10

b) Any other order/orders or direction/directions be issued so as to give complete relief to the petitioner;

¶11

And for this act of kindness, the petitioners shall as in duty bound ever pray.”

¶12

For the nature of relief sought for and for pendency of the representation at the instance of the petitioner, vide Annexure-4 on the selfsame grounds, this writ petition is not entertainable at this stage and the

¶13

¶14

¶15

same stands disposed of directing opposite party no.1 to look into the request of the petitioner, vide Annexure-4 and take decision taking into account the development through Annexure-3 series and the applicability of the decisions as aforesaid within a period of one and half months from the date of communication of this order so also copy of the writ petition by the petitioner.

¶16

It is further directed that after consideration of the representation in terms of the above order if it is found petitioner is entitled to get the benefit, the arrear as well as the current dues shall be calculated and released in favour of the petitioner within a period of fifteen days thereafter. It is made clear that in the event payment involving petitioner is not released within the time stipulated hereinabove, it shall carry interest @7% per annum all through and the interest component shall be recovered from the authority responsible for such delay.

¶17

The petitioner may utilize the soft copy of this order available in the High Court’s website or print out thereof at par with certified copies in the manner prescribed, vide Court’s Notice No.4587, dated 25.03.2020.

¶18

…....…………...…………… Biswanath Rath, J.

¶19

¶20

Bipin Bihari Mohanta v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bipin Bihari Mohanta 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pradeepta Ku.Mohanty Vs O.T.D.C.Ltd.

Chandana Kar Vs Sail

Pravati Pattnaik Vs C.M.C.,Ctc.

Baidhar Behera Vs State of Odisha

Pratima Manjari Giri Vs State of Odisha

Saroj Kumar Mohanta Vs State of Odisha