Jyoti Ranjan Jena Vs LIC of India Ltd., Mumbai

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.5600 of 2025

¶2

Jyoti Ranjan Jena

¶3

..... Petitioner

¶4

Represented By Adv. - Uma Charan Mishra

¶5

-versus-

¶6

1) Lic Of India Ltd., Mumbai ..... Opposite Parties 2) The Executve Director (personnel) Represented By Adv. – 3) The Managing Director Mr. Ashok Kumar (personnel) Mohanty

¶7

1. The Zonal Manager, Lic Of India,

¶8

Bihar

¶9

The Sr. Div. Manager, Lic Of India, Cuttack

¶10

CORAM:

¶11

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

25.02.2025

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

¶16

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned Counsel for the LIC-Opposite Parties.

¶17

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

¶18

“The Petitioner therefore, prays that your Lordships would be graciously pleased to admit this case, issue notice, call for the records and after hearing the parties, quash the impugned letter dt.25.04.2023 under Annexure-5 so also direct the Opposite parties to give the entire service and financial benefits to the Petitioner with effect from the year 2015-16 till date within a stipulated

¶19

Page 1 of 3.

¶20

period which may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.”

¶21

Being aggrieved by order dated 25.04.2023 under Annexure-2, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ application.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset contended that, by virtue of the impugned order under Annexure-2 punishment has been imposed on the petitioner by the disciplinary authority. He further contended that while imposing punishment on the petitioner the Opposite Parties have not taken note of the relaxation granted with regard to the yardstick fixed by the Opposite Party-LIC with regard to employees, in terms of the letter dated 11.06.2021 under Annexure-3 to the writ application. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that he has also challenged the quantum of punishment on the ground of pandemic.

¶23

Learned counsel appearing for the Opposite Party-LIC on the other hand contended that the order under challenge in the present writ application is an appealable one. In such view of the matter, the petitioner should have approached the appellate authority under the rules.

¶24

Considering such submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the parties, on a careful examination of the background facts and further keeping in view fact that the impugned order is an appealable one and also that the representation of the petitioner dated 03.09.2024 is pending

¶25

Page 2 of 3.

¶26

before the Opposite Party No.1, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ application at the stage of admission by granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the appellate authority by filing appeal memo as has been provided under by the LIC of India Staff Rules, 1960 within a period of two weeks from today along with an application for condonation of delay if any. In the event any such application is filed for condonation delay, the Appellate Authority shall take the same into consideration. Thereafter, the appeal be heard and be considered on merits, by taking into consideration the relaxation granted under Annexure-3 to the writ application. Further, it is directed that appellate authority shall make every endeavour to dispose of the appeal within a period of three months from the date of communication of a certified copy of today’s order.

¶27