This court disposed of a writ petition seeking directions for pensionary benefits including past service under a Co-operative Society. The judge directed the petitioner to file a fresh representation with the competent authority to decide the matter.
Direction to petitioner to file a fresh representation with Opposite Party No.5 within two weeks.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.29382 of 2023
Santilata Patnaik
…. Petitioner Mr. K.K. Nayak, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha & others
…. Opposite Parties Mr. P.K.Muduli, A.S.C.
CORAM:
JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA
ORDER
Order No.
16.11.2023
“In the aforesaid premises, it is most humbly prayed that the Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue notice to the opp. parties calling upon them to show cause as to why the prayer of the petitioner for a direction to the opp.parties to consider the past services rendered by the employees of the petitioner’s union under ARECS for the purpose of counting the period of qualifying services and upon their showing no cause, false cause or insufficient cause make the rule absolute by issuing a direction to the opp.parties to take into account the past services of the employees of the petitioner’s union rendered under ARECS for the purpose of extending the terminal and pensionary benefits.
And pass such other order/orders that may be deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
// 2 //
the Petitioner that the Petitioner was initially appointed on 12.09.1980 by the Athagarh Rural Electricity Co-operative Society. While continuing in the aforesaid society, the business of OSEB as well as the Co-operative Society were taken over by the GRIDCO in the year 1996. While taking over the Co-operative Society, the GRIDCO has also taken over the employees, who were working under the Society. Accordingly, the Petitioner, who is an employee of the GRIDCO, while working in the GRIDCO, has retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation with effect from 30.09.2011. It is further contended by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the real dispute arose after retirement of the Petitioner as he was not paid the terminal as well as pensionary benefits as is due and admissible to him.
// 3 //
establishment and such Society was governed under EPF Act. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the aforesaid 2nd Writ Petition was also disposed of by this Court vide order 05.07.2023 granting liberty to the Petitioner to file Writ Petitions individually. Accordingly, the present Writ Petition has been filed by the present Petitioner.
// 4 //
Government for approval. Accordingly, the decision taken in the aforesaid meeting could not be given effect to.
// 5 //
background facts of the present case, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the Writ Petition at the stage of admission by directing the Petitioner to approach Opposite Party No.5 by filing a fresh representation along with all supporting documents within two weeks from today. In the event such a representation is filed, the Opposite Party No.5 shall do well to consider the case of the Petitioner keeping in view the factual scenario of this case as well as proceeding of the meeting dated 24.03.2008 under Annexure-2 to the Writ Petition as well as the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Prem Singh ’s case (supra) and accordingly take a decision in accordance with law by passing a speaking and reasoned order within a period of two months from the date of filing of the representation along with certified copy of this order. The decision so taken shall be communicated to the Petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of taking such decision.
RKS
Digitally Signed Signed by: RAMESH KUMAR SINGH Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 20-Nov-2023 10:48:43
Signature Not Verified
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be directed to approach the competent authority for redressal of grievance regarding pensionary benefits before approaching the High Court.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to consider past services rendered in the Co-operative Society for calculation of terminal and pensionary benefits after takeover by GRIDCO.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Prem Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors.Explained¶28
(2019) 10 SCC 516 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Santilata Patnaik
State of Odisha
A.K. Mohapatra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
