Disposed

Sabita Kumari Pattnaik v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC28 Feb 2023WP(C)/4596/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition seeking retrospective promotion and benefits. Court disposed of the matter by directing the State to consider the petitioner's representation within two months without expressing an opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Opposite Party No. 1 to consider the petitioner's representation (Annexure-7) and grant benefits if applicable, taking Annexure-6 into consideration within two months.

Sabita Kumari Pattnaik 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. 4596 of 2023

¶3

Sabita Kumari Pattnaik

¶4

….. Petitioner

¶5

Mr.S.C. Sahoo, Advocate.

¶6

Vs.

¶7

….. State of Odisha &Others Opposite Parties State Counsel

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

¶10

ORDER

¶11

28.02.2023

¶12

Order No. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 01. 2. Heard.

¶13

3. The present Writ Petition has been filed with the following prayer:- “The petitioner therefore prays that your Lordship may be graciously pleased to:-

¶14

i) direct the opp. parties to grant similar benefits of retrospective promotion to the cadre of Jr. SES and allow T.G. scale of pay notionally with effect from 31.10.1991 the date from which she completed 3 years of service against LSES post as has been granted to similarly situated person viz-Smt. Mamata Dash, Kiran Chandra Mishra, Dillip Kumar Badapanda and others vide Annexure-6 and thereby quashing the order dt.14.12.2022 vide Annexure-5.

¶15

ii) pass such other orders /directions as may be deemed fit and proper in the bonafide interest of justice”.

¶16

4. In course of hearing, learned counsel for the Petitioner states that highlighting his grievances, the Petitioner has made a representation to Opposite Party No.1 vide Annexure-7 and the same may be directed to be considered taking into consideration under Annexure-6 within a stipulated time, to which learned Counsel for the State has no objection.

¶17

Page 1 of 2

¶18

5. As agreed by learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, disposes of the Writ Petition directing Opposite Party No.1 to consider the representation filed by the petitioner vide Annexure-7, and taking into consideration under Annexure-6 within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶19

Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.

¶20

Subrat

¶21

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge

¶22

Page 2 of 2

Sabita Kumari Pattnaik v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sabita Kumari Pattnaik v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Basudev Barik Vs Vice Chancellor, Utkal University of Culture, Bihar

Phulamani Murmu Vs State of Odisha

Manjulata Behera Vs State of Odisha

Srikumar Patel Vs Laxman Bhoi, District Education Officer, Sonepur

Amit Kumar Swain Vs the Secy. to Govt.,H and Fw Dept.

Kshiti Bhushan Biswal Vs State of Odisha