Disposed

Simanchala Das v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC12 Jun 2023WP(C)/16996/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a writ petition seeking 1st RACP benefits and pay fixation. The High Court disposed of the application at the admission stage, directing a government official to consider a pending representation within eight weeks by a reasoned order.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Opposite Party No.2 to consider the petitioner's pending representation within eight weeks by passing a reasoned order.

Simanchala Das Vs State of Odisha — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.16996 of 2023

¶3

Simanchal Das

¶4

…. Petitioner Mr.R.K.Bisoi, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha and others

¶7

…. Opposite Parties Mr.G.N.Rout, A.S.C.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

12.06.2023

This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State. Perused the Writ Petition as well as the documents annexed thereto.

¶16

The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the following prayer:

¶17

“ In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances as narrated above, it is ardently prayed that this Hon’ble Court be graciously pleased to direct the Opp.Party No.3 to allow the benefit of 1^st RACP of Rs.4200/- w.e.f. 1.1.2013 and fixation of his pay as per level-9 of ORSP Rules, 2017 w.e.f. 1.1.2016 onwards with arrears within a time stipulation as fixed by Hon’ble Court.

¶18

And/or issue any other appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions as deem fit and proper in the fitness of the case.”

¶19

// 2 //

¶20

In course of hearing of the writ application, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner ventilating his grievance has submitted representation before the Collector, Ganjam, Opposite Party No.3 under Annexure-8. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the said representation is pending as of now. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that a direction be issued to the Opposite Party No.2 to consider the representation of the Petitioner within a stipulated period of time.

¶21

Learned Additional Standing Counsel submits that he has no objection if the representation of the Petitioner is considered by the Opposite Party No.2, which is stated to be pending, in accordance with law within a stipulated period of time.

¶22

Considering the limited nature of grievance of the Petitioner, the writ application is disposed of at the stage of admission with a direction to the Opposite Party No.2 to consider the representation of the Petitioner in accordance with law taking into consideration Annexure-5 & 7 within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. The Opposite Party No.2 shall do well to dispose of the representation of the Petitioner by passing a speaking and reasoned order.

¶23

With the aforesaid observation, the writ application stands disposed of.

¶24

RKS

¶25

( A.K. Mohapatra )

¶26

Judge

¶27

Signature Not Verified

¶28

Digitally Signed Signed by: RAMESH KUMAR SINGH Designation: Ex-A.R.-cum-Sr. Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orisssa Date: 19-Jun-2023 14:15:21

Simanchala Das v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Simanchala Das 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Binod Chandra Behera Vs Ouat, Bbsr

Tiryak Kumar Samant Vs Odisha University of Agriculture and Technology, Bbsr

Dr. Ipsita Mishra Vs Odisha University of Agriculture and Technology, Bbsr

Benudhar Pasayat Vs the Secy., Revenue Dept., Bbsr

Subhashree Behera Vs State of Odisha

Jagamohan Nayak Vs State of Odisha