Orissa State Housing Board Retired Employees Association, Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Orissa State Housing Board Retired Employees Association, Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the ground on which the association's claim for extension of pension benefits to its retired employees was rejected vide the impugned order is sustainable in the eye of law, given Rule 5(3) of the Orissa Housing Board Rules, 1970. +1 more

Court's answer

The claim was rejected because the employees for whom the association claims have already got the benefit after retirement and the present claim was made by the association much after the retirement of their employees; this ground is sustained.

Ratio / Principle

A writ petition in a service matter filed at the instance of an association is not maintainable, in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Mahinder Kumar Gupta & Ors. v. Union of India, Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas, (1995) 1 SCC 85.

Key takeaways

No illegality or irregularity was found with the impugned order and the Court was not inclined to interfere with it.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition by the Orissa State Housing Board Retired Employees Association, Bhubaneswar (W.P.(C) No.735 of 2022, High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, order dated 01.09.2025, Justice Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) challenging the rejection of its claim to extend the benefit of pension to retired Housing Board employees, a claim rested on Rule 5(3) of the Orissa Housing Board Rules, 1970, under which the service rules applicable to Government employees, including retirement benefits including pension, apply to the officers and employees of the Board. The Court dismissed the writ petition both on merit and on maintainability: on merit, because the employees had already got their retirement benefits and the association's claim was made much after their retirement, the Court finding no illegality or irregularity in the impugned order; on maintainability, because, relying on Mahinder Kumar Gupta & Ors. v. Union of India, Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas, (1995) 1 SCC 85, a service-matter writ petition at the instance of an association is not maintainable.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C) No.735 of 2022

Orissa State Housing Board Retired Employees Association, Bhubaneswar

Petitioner

Mr. M. Agarwal, Advocate

-versus-

State of Odisha & Anr.

…. Opposite Parties Mr. M.R. Mohanty, AGA

CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER 01.09.2025

Order No.

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

2 . Heard Mr. M. Agarwal, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner’s association. None appeared on behalf of the Orissa State Housing Board in spite of due appearance.

3 . The present Writ Petition has been filed at the instance of the association challenging the rejection of the association’s claim to extend the benefit of the pension in favour of its retired employees.

4 . It is contended that such a decision was taken basing on the earlier order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.12696 of 2021.

4 . 1 . Placing reliance on the rules framed under Annexure-2, i.e. Orissa Housing Board Rules, 1970, more

// 2 //

particularly Rule-5 (3), it is contended that the employees who were working under the Housing Board are eligible to get the benefit of pension as like Government employees. Rule-5(3) of the Rules reads as follows:

“5(3) The service rules in regard to age limit, leave, allowances, discipline and conduct and retirement benefits including pension applicable from time to time to the Government employees shall apply to the officers and employees of the Board.”

4 . 2 . Placing reliance on the aforesaid rules, it is contended that the ground on which claim of the association has been rejected vide the impugned order is not sustainable in the eye of law.

5 . This Court after going through the impugned order finds that such claim was rejected as the employees for which the association is making the claim have already got the benefit after the retirement and the present claim was made by the association much after the retirement of their employees.

5.1 . It is also the view of this Court that in service matter writ petition at the instance of an association is not maintainable in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Mahinder Kumar Gupta & Ors. vs. Union of India, Minsitry of Petroleum & Natural Gas , reported in (1995) 1 SCC-85. This Court accordingly finds no illegality or irregularity with the impugned order and is not inclined to interfere with the same.

Page 2 of 3

// 3 //

6 . Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed on the ground of merit as well as on the ground of maintainability.

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge

Subrat

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBRAT KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CU TTACK Date: 09-Sep-2025 15:57:16

Page 3 of 3