Allowed

Jitendra Kumar Choudhury v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC11 Apr 2023WP(C)/8549/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed the punishment order and its confirmation because a second show-cause notice was not issued, as admitted by the respondent officer. Consequently, the petitioner, a retired employee, was directed to be sanctioned all due retiral benefits.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the impugned order dated 12.08.2021 and order of confirmation dated 11.04.2022. Direction to sanction retirement benefits within three months.

Jitendra Kumar Choudhury Vs State of Odisha — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.8549 of 2023

¶2

Jitendra Kumar Choudhury

¶3

…. Petitioner

¶4

Mr. H.P. Rath, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha and Others

¶7

…. Opposite Parties Mr. S.K. Samal, AGA

¶8

Mr. Niranjan Behera, D.E.O., Jagatsinghpur

¶9

CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

ORDER

11.04.2023

Order No.

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

¶14

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶15

3 . Pursuant to the direction issued by this Court Sri Niranjan Behera, D.E.O., Jagatsinghpur appeared before this Court in person and he fairly contended that prior to imposing the order of punishment vide order dated 12.08.2021 under Anexure-17, no second show-cause as provided under Rule 15(10)(i)(a)(b) was ever issued to the petitioner.

¶16

4 . In view of such admission made by the D.E.O., Jagatsinghpur-O.P. No.3, who happens to be the Disciplinary Authority, the order of punishment passed under Annexure-17 and confirmed by the learned Appellate Authority vide order dated 11.04.2022 under Annexure-19 are hereby quashed. Since the proceeding is of the year 2002 and the petitioner is a retired employee, having retired since in the year 2010, this Court is not

¶17

// 2 //

¶18

ready to accept the prayer made by the learned Addl. Government Advocate to remand the matter to the Disciplinary Authority, to start the proceeding afresh from the stage of issuance of second show-cause.

¶19

5 . In view of the quashing of the impugned order of punishment so passed under Annexure-17 and confirmed under Annexure-19, this Court directs Opposite Party No.3 to sanction all the retiral benefits as due and admissible to the petitioner within a period of 3 (three) months from the date of receipt of this order.

¶20

6 . The Writ Petition is accordingly allowed.

¶21

7 . Personal appearance of the D.E.O., Jagatsinghpur is dispensed with.

¶22

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge

¶23

Basudev

¶24

Page 2 of 2

Jitendra Kumar Choudhury v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra Kumar Choudhury 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Susanta Ku.Sahoo Vs Basen Hansadah

Debiprasad Mandhata Vs State of Odisha

Bijan Kumar Das Vs State of Odisha

Begum Benazin Bibi Vs Rupa Rosan Sahoo, IAS

Muralidhar Sahoo Vs Aswathy S., IAS

Ramesh Kumar Naik Vs State of Odisha