Bijaya Kumar Mohanty Vs State of Odisha

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned counsel for the Opposite Parties. Perused the writ application as well as the documents annexed thereto.

¶15

The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the following prayer:

¶16

“It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that your Lordships may graciously be pleased to admit the Writ Petition and issue Rule 'NISI' to the Opp. Parties, calling for the records and after hearing the parties to this writ petition, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue;

¶17

(i) Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ(s) directing the Opp. Parties to sanction and release the family pension in favour of the petitioner since 2017 and to pay all arrear family

¶18

Page 1 of 4.

¶19

pension dues with an interest of 10% p.a. from 2017 till the date of deposit of the said amount within a stipulated period of time;

¶20

(ii) Direct the Opp. Parties to pay further penal interest over the arrear family pension amount @18% p.a. from the date the same became due till the payment.

¶21

And pass such other or further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.”

¶22

Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset submitted that the father of the Petitioner, namely one Late Basudev Mohanty was working as Worksarakar. Thereafter, on attaining the age of superannuation, the father of the Petitioner has retired from government service after which he was getting his pensionary benefits. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that the father of the Petitioner died on 31.01.2017 leaving behind his disabled son, the present Petitioner. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that in terms of Rule 56(5)(e) of the OCS (Pension) Rules, 1992 the Petitioner applied for disabled family pension along with a disability certificate issued by the competent authority, under Annexure-2 to the writ petition. Further, referring to the disability certificate under Annexure-2, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the present Petitioner has been medically certified to be mentally retarded and such disability has been accessed at 50 % permanent disability. On such ground, learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that although the Petitioner is entitled to get disabled family pension, however, the same has not been considered by the Opposite Parties as of now. Being aggrieved by such inaction on the part of the Opposite Party, the Petitioner has

¶23

Page 2 of 4.

¶24

approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.

¶25

Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that the Office of the Superintendent Engineer, Cuttack (R&B) Division, Opposite Party No.4 has written a letter to the Office of the Principal Accountant General (A & E) in the context of the grant of family pension to the present Petitioner and all the relevant papers have been forwarded to the Office of the Principal Accountant General (A & E) vide Memo No.7480 dated 16.09.2022. He further contended that despite such recommendation of the competent authority, the Office of the Principal Accountant General (A & E) has not sanctioned and disbursed the disability pension, as is due and admissible to the present Petitioner.

¶26

Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that the State-Opposite Parties have forwarded the application of the Petitioner to the Office of the Principal Accountant General (A & E), Odisha, Bhubaneswar. In the aforesaid context, learned counsel for the State, referred to the Memo dated 16.09.2022 under Annexure-3 to the writ petition. On such ground, learned counsel for the State submitted that no fault can be ascribed to the State-Opposite Parties.

¶27

Mr. S.K. Patra, learned Standing Counsel appearing for Principal Accountant General, Odisha, Bhubaneswar, on the other hand contended that he has no instruction in the matter. He further contended that in the event, the application has been forwarded and the same is pending before the Opposite Party No.3, i.e. the Principal Accountant General (A&E), Odisha, Bhubaneswar, he will have no objection in the event this Court directs the Opposite Party No.3 to consider such application in terms of the rules and dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible.

¶28

Page 3 of 4.

¶29

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties, on a careful examination of the documents annexed to the writ petition, further keeping in view the limited nature of the grievance of the Petitioner, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ petition at the stage of admission by directing the Opposite Party No.3 to consider the application of the Petitioner for grant of disability family pension within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of a certified copy of today’s order. The final decision so taken be communicated to the Petitioner within ten days thereafter. It is further directed that in the event it is found that the Petitioner is entitled to the disability pension under Rule 56(5)(e) of the OCS (Pension) Rules, 1992, then necessary steps be taken for sanction and disbursal of the amount within six weeks from the date of taking such decision.

¶30

With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶31

( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra ) Judge

¶32

S.K. Rout

¶33

Signature Not Verified

¶34

Digitally Signed Signed by: SANTANU KUMAR ROUT Reason: Authentication Page 4 of 4. Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 18-Feb-2025 09:53:10

Bijaya Kumar Mohanty v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bijaya Kumar Mohanty v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prasanta Kumar Sahu Vs State of Odisha

Manoj Kabi Vs State of Odisha

Satyajit Patra Vs State of Odisha

Jajnaseni Dip Vs State of Odisha

Minati Nahak Vs State of Odisha

Basanti Prusti Vs Union of India