Disposed

Shyam Sundar Naik v. Chief Resident Commission, Govt. of Odisha, New Delhi

Orissa HC9 May 2023WP(C)/4139/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a retired government employee, sought quashing of letters refusing pension and directed retirement benefit disbursement. Court held delay was not the Authority's fault but due to inter-spousal dispute, yet ordered expeditious processing within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed Opposite Party No.1 to process pension papers within six weeks; directed Accountant General to disburse amount within four weeks of receiving papers.

Shyam Sundar Naik Vs Chief Resident… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.4139 of 2023

¶3

Shyam Sundar Naik

¶4

…. Petitioner Mr. P.K. Mohanty, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

…. Chief Resident Commission, Govt. Opposite Parties of Odisha, New Delhi & others

¶7

Mr. S. Das, AGA Mr. S.K. Patra, Standing Counsel for A.G. Odisha

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

09.05.2023

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

¶15

Heard Mr. P.K. Mohanty, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. S. Das, learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State-Opposite Parties & Mr. S.K. Patra, learned Standing Counsel for Accountant General, Odisha. Perused the writ petition as well as the documents annexed thereto.

¶16

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

¶17

“Therefore the Petitioner most fervently prays that

¶18

the writ application be admitted and rule nisi be issued to

¶19

i) To quash the letter dt.16.01.2021 and 16.03.2021 vide Annexure-10 & 11.

¶20

ii) To direct opposite parties to disburse the final pension and other retiral benefits and other benefits of the Petitioner as claimed in the petition.

¶21

iii) To pass any order/orders which this Hon’ble Court deems fit to provide justice to the Petitioner.”

¶22

// 2 //

¶23

It is submitted by learned counsel for the Petitioner that the present Petitioner is a retired Government employee who has retired from service on 30.09.2014 while he was working as a Peon at New Delhi Tourism Office. It is further contended by learned counsel for the Petitioner that there was no proceeding either the departmental or disciplinary are pending against the petitioner. However, the Petitioner is not getting the pensionary benefits as of now. Earlier the Petitioner also approached before this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.27996 of 2020 which was disposed of on 09.11.2020 by directing the Opposite Party No.1 to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of family pension as well as other retiral dues within a period of two months. After disposal of the aforesaid writ application the Petitioner approached the Opposite Party No.1-Chief Resident Commission, Govt. of Odisha, New Delhi by filing a representation on 17.11.2020 under Annexure-9 which was disposed of by the Opposite Party No.1 vide order dated 16.01.2021. On perusal of the aforesaid order dated 16.01.2021 under Annexure-10, this Court observed that in para-9 & 10 of the order, the Opposite Party No.1 has indicated non-compliance of certain requirements for processing of the pension papers. In such view of the matter, the Opposite Party No.1 disposed of the representation by holding that the same cannot be granted in the absence of certain documents further with observation that the matter needs to be examined by the Law Department. Govt. of Odisha. Thereafter, vide order dated 16.03.2021 the Petitioner was called upon to submit from-3 & 5 as provided under the OCS (Pension) Rules for processing the claim of pension along with other relevant documents. It is submitted by learned counsel for the Petitioner that pursuant to such letter dated16.03.2021 under Annexure11, the Petitioner has already submitted the forms and relevant documents. However, he further contended that till now the claim of the Petitioner for pensionary as well as retiral benefits have not been

¶24

// 3 //

¶25

processed by the Opposite Parties.

¶26

Learned Addl. Government Advocate, on the other hand submitted that the claim of the Petitioner for pensionary as well as the retiral benefits has not been process due to want of certain documents. He further contended that the dispute between the two wives of the Petitioner as a result of which a proceeding in Judge of Family Court, Dhenkanal vide CRP No.158 of 2014 was pending which was disposed of with a direction to the Pension Sanctioning Authority to pay the pension to 2^nd wife of the Petitioner. In such view of the matter, learned Addl. Government Advocate submitted that the processing of pensionary as well as retiral benefits as is due and admissible to the Petitioner is delay for reasons beyond the control of Pension Sanctioning Authority.

¶27

Mr. S.K. Patra, learned Standing Counsel for A.G., Odisha submitted that the pension papers of the Petitioner have not been forwarded to the Office of the Principal Accountant General by the Pension Sanctioning Authority. Therefore, no fault can be found with the Accountant General-Opposite Party No.3. He further submitted, in the event pension papers have forwarded and the same shall be considered in accordance with rules as expeditiously as possible.

¶28

Considering the submissions made by learned counsels appearing for the respective parties and upon a careful scrutiny of the background facts of the present case and on perusal of the documents annexed to the writ application as well as the communications between the Petitioner and the Pension Sanctioning Authority, this Court is of the considered view that dispute with regard to the nonpayment of pensionary as well as retiral benefits can be resolved, if the Petitioner cooperate with the Pension Sanctioning Authority by providing all the required documents. In the event, Petitioner has

¶29

// 4 //

¶30

already submitted such documents, then he need not resubmit such documents. So far the proceeding before the Judge of Family Court, Dhenkanal, is concerned the same is looked into and given effect to by the Pension Sanctioning Authority as well as the Accountant General-Opposite Party No.3. However, this Court deems that the same cannot be a ground the pensionary as well as the retiral benefits payable to the Petitioner.

¶31

Accordingly, it is directed that the Opposite Party No.1 shall do well to process the pension papers of the Petitioner as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of six weeks from today. The petitioner is directed to cooperate with the Pension Sanctioning Authority. In the event, the Pension Papers are forwarded to the Office of the Opposite Party No.3, the Opposite Party No.3 shall process the claim of the Petitioner and disburse the final amount in favor of the Petitioner on the basis of recommendation of Pension Sanctioning Authority within a period of four weeks from the date of submission of such pension papers in accordance with law as well as the rules.

¶32

With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the writ application stands disposed of.

¶33

Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.

¶34

( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge

¶35

Anil

¶36

Digitally signed by ANIL KUMAR ANIL KUMAR SAHOO SAHOO Date: 2023.05.10 18:39:21 +05'30'

Shyam Sundar Naik v. Chief Resident Commission, Govt. of Odisha, New Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shyam Sundar Naik v. Chief Resident Commission, Govt. of Odisha, New Delhi

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

Niranjan Rout Vs State of Odisha

Shyam Sundar Sethy Vs State of Odisha

Jayanta Kumar Patel Vs State of Odisha

Naresh Kumar Agrawal Vs Ramesh Kumar Agrawal

Kailash Nath Pattanaik Vs State of Odisha

Soumya Ranjan Sahu Vs State of Odisha