Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ petition as well as the documents annexed thereto.

¶16

The present writ application has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer:-

¶17

“ It is therefore, humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to:-

¶18

i) direct the opp. parties to modify the Grade Pay to Rs.5400/- towards 2^nd financial upgradation under MACP instead of Rs.4800/- as has been given to other similarly situated persons vide order dated 13.08.2018 & 09.11.2018 under Annexure-4 and order dated 23.12.2022, dt. 16.1.2023 and 27.01.2023 under Annexure-6 in terms of the principles decided in O.A. No.2237/2014 and 13 batch relying the judgment of this Hon’ble

¶19

// 2 //

¶20

Court in W.P.(C) No.2831/2016; State of Odisha vrs. Biharilal Barik, which has been affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP Diary No.20358/2017 and also make pay fixation as per rules and the accrued arrear be released in favour of the petitioner within a stipulated period;

¶21

ii) Pass such other order(s)/direction(s) as would be deem fit and proper in the bonafide interest of justice;”

¶22

It is submitted by Mr. P.K. Mohapatra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of 2^nd RACP financial upgradation as per the resolution of the Finance Department dated 06.02.2013. He further contended that similarly placed employees have also been extended such benefits pursuant to order passed by this Court earlier. Learned counsel for the petitioner also referred to the order passed in one such case i.e. W.P.(C) No.5455 of 2023 disposed of on 27.02.2023 (in the matter of Benudhar Naik vs. State of Odisha others ). Learned counsel for the petitioner further drawing the attention of this Court to Annexure-4 and 6, i.e. order dated 16.01.2023 and 13.08.2018 submitted that the benefit of 2^nd & 3^rd financial upgradation has already been extended in favour of 16 nos. of Civil Engineers, pursuant to order passed by either the Odisha Administrative Tribunal or this Court. A list of such engineers has been enclosed to Annexure-4 and 6. It is further contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that although the petitioner is entitled as per Annexure-3, the order dated 3.4.2017 in O.A. No.2237/2014 & batch, and approached the Office of Opposite Party No.1, however, the petitioner and similarly situated many other engineers have been asked by the Office of the Opposite Party No.1 to obtain orders from this Court, such approach has been deprecated by this Court on several occasions. Further, it is made clear that in the event the petitioner is

¶23

// 3 //

¶24

legally entitled to claim such benefits he is to be extended with such benefits along with similarly situated persons, no order from this Court is required in this regard in view of the order vide Annexure-3 & 4. Such conduct on the part of the Offices of Opposite Party in this regard keep the law as well as the Magistry of this Court.

¶25

Learned Additional Government Advocate, on the other hand, submits that let the petitioner approach the Opposite Party No.1 by filing a fresh representation stating therein all the aforesaid facts and in the event, such a representation is filed the Opposite party No.1 shall do well to consider the same in accordance with law and dispose of the same within a stipulated period of time.

¶26

Considering such submission made by learned counsels appearing for the respective parties, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ application at the stage of admission by directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation taking therein all the grounds available to him including the fact that similar benefits have already been extended in favour of 16 nos. and 33 nos. of Civil Engineers vide order dated 13.08.2018, 16.01.2023 & 27.01.2023 under Annexure-4 and 6 to the writ application. In the event, such a representation is filed the Opposite Party No.1 shall do well to consider the same in accordance with law taking into consideration Annexures-3, 4 and 6 within a period of eight weeks from the date filing of representation of the petitioner. The Opposite party No.1 while considering the representation of the petitioner shall keep in mind that similarly situated Civil Engineers have been extended such benefits and in the event, it is found that the petitioner stands in a similar footing with the Civil Engineers, who have been extended such benefits, similar benefits be also extended to the petitioner expeditiously.

¶27

With the aforesaid observations/ directions the writ petition

¶28

// 4 //

¶29

stands disposed of.

¶30

Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.

¶31

( A.K. Mohapatra) Judge

¶32

Debasis

¶33

Signature Not Verified

¶34

Digitally Signed Signed by: DEBASIS AECH Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: OHC, CUTTACK. Date: 09-Nov-2023 13:12:53

Syed Amjeed Ali v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Syed Amjeed Ali v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhikari Ch. Rout Vs State

Kishore Chandra Das Vs State of Odisha

K.Kailash Chandra Vs State of Odisha

Ranjit Kishor Senapati Vs State of Odisha

Sabara Biswal Vs State of Odisha

Biswanath Sahu Vs Jayant Kumar Behera