Disposed

Upendra Kumar Mishra v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC1 Mar 2023WP(C)/5259/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single bench order disposing a writ petition seeking declaration of retirement benefits. The Court directed the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and pass an order within one month without expressing opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Opposite Party No.2 to consider the representation filed by the petitioner and pass appropriate order within one month.

Upendra Kumar Mishra 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.5259 of 2023

¶3

Upendra Kumar Mishra …. Petitioner

¶4

-versus-

¶5

…. Opp. Parties

¶6

State of Odisha & Others

¶7

CORAM:
JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

¶8

ORDER
Order 01.03.2023
No
1. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid
Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode.
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned
counsel for the State-Opposite Parties.
3. The present Writ Petition has been filed with the
following prayer: -
“It is, therefore, prayed that Your
Lordships would be graciously pleased to admit
this writ petition, call for the records and issue
RULE NISI calling upon the Opp. Parties to show
cause as to why;

¶9

(i) the Petitioner shall not be extended with retiral benefits as is due to the Petitioner by virtue of the Petitioner’s service being covered under the Orissa Education (Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Teachers and Members of Staff of Aided Educational Institutions) Rules, 1974; and Odisha Aided Educational Institutions Employees Retirement Benefits Rules, 1981’

¶10

If the Opposite Parties fail to show cause or show insufficient cause, the said rule may be made absolute.”

¶11

// 2 //

¶12

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.2 vide Annexure-10 and the same may be directed to be considered within a stipulated time, to which learned counsel for the State has no objection.

¶13

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, dispose of the Writ Petition directing Opposite Party No.2 to consider the representation filed by the petitioner vide Annexure-10, and pass appropriate order in accordance with law within a period of one month from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶14

Issue urgent certified copy as per Rules.

¶15

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge

¶16

Basudev

¶17

Page 2 of 2

Upendra Kumar Mishra v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Upendra Kumar Mishra 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Srikumar Patel Vs Laxman Bhoi, District Education Officer, Sonepur

Sabita Kumari Pattnaik Vs State of Odisha

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

Krushna Chandra Parhi Vs Aswathy S., I.A.S.

Ramesh Chandra Nayak Vs State of Odisha

Chandra Sekhar Sarangi Vs State of Odisha