Udayendu Mishra Vs Odisha Small Industries Corporation Ltd.(Osic), Cuttack

(i) direct / order the Opp. Party No.2 to release the Gratuity, Leave Salary etc., within a stipulated period, as may be prescribed by this Hon'ble Court for the interest of justice; (ii) pass such other order(s) or issue direction(s) as may be deemed fit and proper in the bona fide interest of justice.”

¶25

It is submitted by learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner was working as Joint Manager in the office of O.S.I.C. While working as such, the Petitioner was placed under suspension on

¶26

04.06.2018. Accordingly, his headquarter was fixed on Jeypore. Thereafter, the Petitioner was reinstated in service on 10.05.2023. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the memo of charge was served on the Petitioner dated 24.07.2018 by Managing Director Corporation. Such memo was challenged by the Petitioner on the ground of jurisdiction by filing W.P.(C) No.16238 of 2018. The said writ application was disposed of by a Coordinate Bench of this Court with a direction to the Opposite Parties to conclude the proceeding against the Petitioner within six months. The order passed by the Coordinate Bench was challenged by the Opposite Parties before a Division Bench of this Court by filing W.A. No.33 of 2019. The Hon’ble Division Bench vide order dated 28.10.2021 dismissed the writ appeal thereby confirming the order passed in the writ petition. Further, since the Opposite Parties had preferred writ appeal against the interim order passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court while dismissing the writ appeal, the Hon’ble Division Bench also dismissed the writ appeal. Similarly, W.P.(C) No.31129 of 2018 was also disposed of. After disposal of the aforesaid writ petition as well as the writ appeal, the Opposite Parties conducted an enquiry on 05.04.2022.

¶27

While the matter stood thus, the Petitioner again approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.12895 of 2023. The said writ application was disposed of by this Court on 26.04.2023 by granting liberty to the Petitioner to make any application for reinstatement in service and in such eventuality the Opposite Parties was directed to consider the same keeping in view the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhury vs. Union of India reported in (2015) 6 SCC 29. Thereafter, the Petitioner was reinstated in service on 10.05.2023.

¶28

While the matter stood thus, the Petitioner was called upon to submit his explanation on 10.12.2023. While this was the position, the

¶29

Petitioner retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation w.e.f. 31.12.2023. The grievance of the Petitioner in the present writ application is that although the Petitioner has retired from service w.e.f. 31.12.2023, he has not been paid his gratuity as well as leave salary as is due and admissible to him. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at this juncture contended that no proceeding is pending against the Petitioner. However, the day before his retirement, the Petitioner has been issued with a memo calling for an explanation from the Petitioner. She further contended that the same by no stretch of imagination be construed as a proceeding pending against the Petitioner. In such view of the matter, it is submitted that the Opposite Parties be directed to sanction and disburse the gratuity as well as leave salary as is due and admissible to the Petitioner.

¶30

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner, further keeping in view the factual background of the present case as well as materials on record, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ application at the stage of admission by directing the Opposite Parties to consider the grievance of the Petitioner. It is further directed that in the event it is found that no proceeding is pending against the Petitioner, the Opposite Parties shall do well to sanction and disburse the gratuity as well as leave salary in favor of the Petitioner in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of communication of a certified copy of this order. The final decision so taken be communicated to the Petitioner within two weeks from the date of taking such a decision.

¶31

Since this writ application is being disposed of at the stage of admission without issuing notice to the Opposite Parties, liberty is given to the Opposite Parties to seek for variation/ modification of this order, in the event it is found that the Petitioner has suppressed any materials information or mislead this Court in any factual aspects by filing the

¶32

Anil

¶33

present writ application.

¶34