Surya Narayan Pradhan Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Surya Narayan Pradhan Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Impugned order dated 05.09.2024 (JMFC, G.Udayagiri, MC No.07 of 2024) set aside; case remitted to the learned JMFC, G.Udayagiri to consider the petitioner's pay-slip and decide whether any arrear amount remains payable; liberty to both parties to produce pay-slips and supporting documents.

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 05.09.2024 of the learned JMFC, G.Udayagiri directing further deduction of Rs.90,000/- from the petitioner's salary towards arrear maintenance for 09.05.2023 to 08.02.2024 was sustainable despite the petitioner's contention that no arrear remained outstanding pursuant to the order dated 08.12.2021 in MC No.32 of 2021. +1 more

Court's answer

The order dated 05.09.2024 passed by the learned J.M.F.C., G.Udayagiri in MC No.07 of 2024 is set aside and the case is remitted back to the learned JMFC, G.Udayagiri.

Ratio / Principle

On remand, the learned JMFC, G.Udayagiri is directed to take into account the petitioner's pay-slip, consider whether any arrear amount remains to be paid, and pass orders accordingly.

Key takeaways

Both parties are granted liberty to produce pay-slips and other supporting documents, if any, in proof of payment/receipt of maintenance.ratio¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Orissa High Court (Savitri Ratho, J.) disposed of CRLMC No.408 of 2025 filed by Surya Narayan Pradhan challenging the order dated 05.09.2024 of the learned JMFC, G.Udayagiri in MC No.07 of 2024, whereby (as contended) further deduction of Rs.90,000/- was directed from his salary towards arrear maintenance for 09.05.2023 to 08.02.2024 despite his plea that no arrears survived the order dated 08.12.2021 in MC No.32 of 2021. The opposite party's counsel maintained that only the monthly maintenance of Rs.10,000/- was being deducted and no excess deduction had been made. Considering the rival submissions, the Court set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter to the learned JMFC, G.Udayagiri with direction to take into account the petitioner's pay-slip, consider whether any arrear amount remains to be paid, and pass orders accordingly; liberty was granted to both parties to produce pay-slips and other supporting documents in proof of payment/receipt of maintenance.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

CRLMC No.408 of 2025

Surya Narayan Pradhan

….. Petitioner

Mr. Susanta Kumar Lenka, Advocate

-versus-

1. State of Odisha

….. Opposite Parties

2. Sasmita Pradhan

3. Simran Pradhan

Mr. Raj Bhusan Dash, ASC Ms. Sujata Jena, Advocate

CORAM:

HON’BLE MISS JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO

ORDER

14.05.2025

(Through hybrid Mode)

Order No.

1. This application has been filed challenging the order dated 05.09.2024 passed by the learned J.M.F.C., G.Udayagiri in MC No.07 of 2024 and with prayer to issue direction to the Block Education Officer, G.Udayagiri (opposite party No.4) not to make further deduction of the arrear maintenance as well as current monthly maintenance from the account of the petitioner.

Mr. Susant Kumar Lenka, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per order dated 08.12.2021 in MC No.32 of 2021, deduction has been made from salary of the petitioner and there is no arrear outstanding against him. But without considering the same, the learned JMFC, G.Udayagiri has directed for deduction of further ₹90,000/- from the salary of the petitioner for the period from 09.05.2023 to 08.02.2024 though the petitioner is not liable to make this payment.

Ms. Sujata Jena, learned counsel for the opposite party

Page 1 of 2

submits that no excess deduction is made from the salary of the petitioner. She further submits that only the monthly maintenance amount of ₹10,000/- is being deducted from the salary of the petitioner and the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is deduction of ₹20,000/- which includes the original amount of ₹10,000/- and the amount directed towards payment of arrear maintenance is not correct.

Considering the submissions of both the learned counsels, order dated 05.09.2024 passed by the learned J.M.F.C., G.Udayagiri in MC No.07 of 2024 is set aside and the case is remitted back to the learned JMFC, G.Udayagiri with direction to take into account the pay-slip of the petitioner and to consider whether any arrear amount remains to be paid and pass orders accordingly. Liberty is granted to both the parties to produce pay-slips and other supporting documents, if any, in proof of payment/receipt of maintenance.

The CRLMC is accordingly disposed of.

(Savitri Ratho) Judge

RKS

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed Signed by: RANJAN KUMAR SETHI Designation: Asst. Registrar-Cum-Senior Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Date: 16-May-2025 21:27:48

Page 2 of 2