Raj Kishore Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.2940 of 2025

¶2

Raj Kishore Sahoo

¶3

..... Petitioner

¶4

Represented By Adv. - Biswabihari Mohanty

¶5

-versus-

¶6

1) State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Parties 2) Secy. To Govt., G.a And P.g Represented By Adv. – Dept., Bbsr Ms. B.K.Sahu, A.G.A. 3) A.g And A.e, Odisha, Bbsr

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

19.02.2025

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

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the documents as well as annexed thereto.

¶14

The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with the following prayers:

¶15

“ Under the above circumstances, it is humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue a writ in appropriate nature to fix the pay of the petitioner in the scale of pay attached to the post under different ORSP Rules with grant of Periodical increments and also under ORSP Rules, 2018 w.e.f.1.1.2016 appropriately with periodical increment till the date of superannuation w.e.f. 31.05.2017and pay all consequential financial benefits in arrear forth with. This Hon'ble Court may further be pleased

¶16

Page 1 of 3.

¶17

to direct the Respondent No- 1 to quantify the last pay drawn and the arrear differential salary and fix the Pension w.e.f. 1.6. 2017 on the said last pay drawn on such properly fixed pay and sanction and disburse the pension and other retirement dues like Pension DCRG, unutilized leave Salary with arrears with a time to be stipulated by this Ho'ble Court.”

¶18

It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner initially joined as an Inspector of Civil Supplies on 23.01.1984 and has retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation w.e.f. 31.05.2017, while he was working as CSO, Bhadrak. He further contended that although no proceeding is pending against the present petitioner. However, the retiral benefits including the pensionary benefit which is due an admissible to the petitioner has not been paid despite several years having passed in the meantime.

¶19

Being aggrieved by such inaction although he approached the Opposite Party No.1 by filing a representation on 14.01.2025 under Annexure-3 to the writ application. He further submitted that the aforesaid representation has been duly received by the Opposite Parties. However, no action has been taken on such representation.

¶20

Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that although he has no instruction in the matter. However, taking into consideration the factual background of the case and considering the prayer involved in the present writ petition, he will have no objection in the event this Court directs the Opposite Party No.1 to reconsider the representation of the petitioner under Annexure-3, if the same is still pending, in accordance with rules and dispose of the same within a stipulated period of time.

¶21

Page 2 of 3.

¶22

Having heard the learned counsels appearing for parties, on a careful examination of their submissions, further keeping in view the facts involved in the present writ application, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ application by directing the Opposite Party No.1 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 25.01.2025 under Annexure-3 in accordance with rules and dispose of the same within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of a certified copy of today’s order. The representation of the petitioner shall be disposed of by passing a speaking and reasoned order. It is further directed that in the event it is found that the petitioner is entitled to the retiral as well as pensionary benefits then the Opposite parties shall do well to sanction and disburse such retiral, Pension, DCRG and unutilised leave salary in favour of the petitioner within six weeks from the date of taking such decision.

¶23