Basanta Kumar Panigrahi Vs Odisha Small Industries Corporation Ltd, Cuttack — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Basanta Kumar Panigrahi Vs Odisha Small Industries Corporation Ltd, Cuttack — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty granted to the Petitioner to file a detailed representation before the Opposite Party-Corporation within three weeks; the Corporation to consider the grievance in accordance with law and, absent legal impediments, to sanction, calculate and disburse the retiral dues within eight weeks of its decision, communicating the decision within ten days thereafter.

Issue for consideration

Whether all retiral benefits of the Petitioner, including gratuity, leave salary and other dues, are to be provided/released by the Odisha Small Industries Corporation Ltd (Opposite Party) in accordance with applicable statutory provisions. +2 more

Court's answer

The writ petition was disposed of at the stage of admission, granting liberty to the Petitioner to approach the Opposite Party-Corporation by filing a detailed representation with all grounds and supporting documents within three weeks, and the Corporation is to consider the Petitioner's grievance in accordance with law.

Ratio / Principle

The Court found that the Petitioner had not approached the Opposite Party-Corporation before filing the present writ petition, and held that the Petitioner should have approached the Corporation for sanction and disbursal of his retiral dues, which are due and admissible to him as per law.

Key takeaways

If it is found that there are no other legal impediments, the Opposite Party-Corporation is to sanction, calculate and disburse the retiral dues of the Petitioner as due and admissible to him within eight weeks from the date of taking such a decision, and any decision so taken shall be communicated to the Petitioner within ten days thereafter.ratio¶¶43

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Orissa at Cuttack (Aditya Kumar Mohapatra, J.), WP(C) No.8674 of 2025, Basanta Kumar Panigrahi v. Odisha Small Industries Corporation Ltd, Cuttack — order dated 21.04.2025. The Petitioner, a former Junior Assistant of OSIC (appointed 31.07.1991) who underwent successive disciplinary proceedings, penalties, appeals and three earlier writ petitions, and retired on superannuation w.e.f. 27.04.2022, sought release of all retiral benefits (gratuity, leave salary and other dues) with interest and costs. Held: the Petitioner had not approached the Opposite Party-Corporation before invoking the Court's jurisdiction and ought first to seek sanction and disbursal of his retiral dues there. The writ petition was disposed of at the stage of admission with liberty to file a detailed representation within three weeks; the Corporation was directed to consider the grievance in accordance with law and, if no legal impediments are found, to sanction, calculate and disburse the retiral dues within eight weeks of its decision, communicating the decision within ten days thereafter.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

WP(C) No.8674 of 2025

Basanta Kumar Panigrahi

.....

Petitioner

Represented By Adv. – Mr. Karunakar Jena

-versus-

Odisha Small Industries Corporation Ltd, Cuttack

.....

Opposite Party

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

ORDER

21.04.2025

Order No.

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

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner. Perused the writ petition as well as the documents annexed thereto.

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

“It is, therefore, prayed that, the Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit the Writ Petition, issue notice to the Opp. Party to show cause as to why all the retiral benefits shall not be provided to the Petitioner by the Odisha Small Industries Corporation Ltd (Opp. Party) and the writ petition shall not be allowed in favour of the Petitioner and to provide all the service benefits to the Petitioner;

And

The Hon'ble Court may further be pleased to direct the Opp.Party to immediately release the

Page 1 of 5.

Petitioner’s retiral benefits, including gratuity, leave salary and other dues, in accordancewith the applicable statutory provisions within a period to be stipulated by the Hon'ble Court;

And

Direct the Opp. Party to make payment of the retiral dues taking into consideration that his juniors were promoted despite hisname being listed above them in the gradation list, which was considered by the Hon’ble Court in W.P.(C) No.20494 of 2021,disposed of on dt.26.07.2021;

And

Award interest on the withheld retiral benefits from the date they became due, as provided under the relevant laws, for theperiod of delay;

And

Award costs for the undue hardship and financial loss causedto the petitioner by the Opp. Party’s failure to provide the retiral benefits in time ;

And

Allow the Writ Petition with cost.”

Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at the outset, contended that initially the Petitioner was appointed as a Junior Assistant under the Opposite Party-Odisha Small Industries Corporation Ltd. on 31.07.1991. While working as such, a disciplinary proceeding was initiated against the Petitioner. Accordingly, he was placed under suspension. Thereafter charge was framed and the Petitioner was dismissed from service vide order dated 21.06.2023.

Being aggrieved by such order of dismissal, the Petitioner preferred an appeal against the order of dismissal dated 11.12.2004. While the appeal was pending, the Petitioner initially approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.6415 of 2005. The above noted writ petition was disposed of on 23.09.2005 directing the OSIC to decide the appeal within a period of three months. Pursuant to the aforesaid

Page 2 of 5.

direction, the Chairman-cum-Appellate Authority allowed the appeal thereby order of dismissal was set aside and the matter was remanded to the disciplinary authority for fresh consideration. Thereafter, the Petitioner was reinstated in service w.e.f. 03.02.2006. After the matter was remanded to the Appellate Authority, additional charges were framed against the Petitioner and the disciplinary authority again found the Petitioner guilty and imposed penalty.

Being aggrieved by such order dated 04.02.2006, the Petitioner again preferred an appeal on 10.02.2006. The Appellate Authority rejected the appeal vide order dated 05.09.2006. Being aggrieved by such rejection order passed by the Appellate Authority, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.15714 of 2007. A coordinate Bench of this Court, on 09.11.2017, disposed of the above noted writ petition by directing the OISC to conclude the disciplinary proceeding in a time bound manner. After disposal of the second writ petition preferred by the Petitioner, the Petitioner approached the Opposite Party-Corporation. The Opposite Party-Corporation issued a second show cause notice on 03.07.2018 under Annexure-8. The Petitioner submitted his reply to the second show cause notice on 20.07.2018. Accordingly, the order of recovery was issued on 12.09.2018. Again the Petitioner preferred an appeal against the order of punishment dated 12.09.2018 by filing an appeal under Annexure-11 to the writ petition. Finally, the Chairman-cum-Appellate Authority (Opposite Party-Corporation) allowed the appeal preferred by the Petitioner against the order dated 12.09.2018 under Annexure-10 and the order of punishment was set aside vide order dated 27.05.2020 under Annexure-13 to the writ petition.

Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at this juncture, further

Page 3 of 5.

contended that after dismissal of the appeal vide order dated 27.05.2020 under Annexure-13, the Petitioner approached the authority for refund of the amounts which were deducted towards the penalty imposed by the Disciplinary Authority. Since such prayer of the Petitioner was not acted upon by the Corporation, the Petitioner was compelled to approach this court by filing W.P.(C) No.6614 of 2022. This Court vide order dated 18.06.2024 disposed of the writ petition by directing the OSIC to refund the deducted amount with interest. He further contended that in the meantime the Petitioner has retired from service w.e.f. 27.04.2022 on attaining the age of superannuation. Being aggrieved by the conduct of the Opposite Parties in not extending the retiral benefits as is due and admissible to the Petitioner, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.

On careful examination of the averments made in the writ petition, this Court found that the Petitioner has not approached the Opposite Party-Corporation before approaching this Court by filing the present writ petition. In such view of the matter, this Court is of the view that the Petitioner should have approached the Opposite PartyCorporation for sanction and disbursal of his retiral dues, which is due and admissible to the Petitioner as per law.

Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of at the state of admission by granting liberty to the Petitioner to approach the Opposite Party-Corporation by filing a detailed representation taking therein all the grounds along with all supporting documents within three weeks from today. In such eventuality, the Opposite PartyCorporation shall do well to consider the grievance of the Petitioner in accordance with law and in the event it is found that there are no other

Page 4 of 5.

legal impediments to the same, the Opposite Party-Corporation shall do well to sanction, calculate and disburse the retiral dues of the Petitioner as is due and admissible to him within a period of eight weeks from the date of taking such a decision. Any decision so taken by the Opposite Party-Corporation on such representation shall be communicated to the Petitioner within ten days thereafter.

With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.

( A.K. Mohapatra )

Judge

Debasis

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed Signed by: DEBASIS AECH Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Date: 22-Apr-2025 18:41:08

Page 5 of 5.

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Prior proceeding
Petitioner appointed as Junior Assistant under the Opposite Party-Odisha Small Industries Corporation Ltd. on 31.07.1991.¶¶32
Prior proceeding
Disciplinary proceeding initiated; Petitioner placed under suspension; charge framed; dismissed from service vide order dated 21.06.2023 (date as printed; see self_check notes).¶¶32
Prior proceeding
Appeal against order of dismissal dated 11.12.2004 (as printed); while appeal pending, W.P.(C) No.6415 of 2005 filed, disposed of on 23.09.2005 directing OSIC to decide the appeal within three months.¶¶33
Prior proceeding
Chairman-cum-Appellate Authority allowed the appeal; order of dismissal set aside; matter remanded to disciplinary authority for fresh consideration.¶¶35
Prior proceeding
Petitioner reinstated in service w.e.f. 03.02.2006.¶¶35
Prior proceeding
Additional charges framed on remand; disciplinary authority again found the Petitioner guilty and imposed penalty.¶¶35
Prior proceeding
Aggrieved by order dated 04.02.2006, appeal preferred on 10.02.2006; Appellate Authority rejected the appeal vide order dated 05.09.2006.¶¶36
Prior proceeding
W.P.(C) No.15714 of 2007 filed; coordinate Bench disposed of it on 09.11.2017 directing OISC to conclude the disciplinary proceeding in a time bound manner.¶¶36
Prior proceeding
Second show cause notice issued on 03.07.2018 under Annexure-8; Petitioner's reply submitted on 20.07.2018.¶¶36
Prior proceeding
Order of recovery issued on 12.09.2018; Petitioner preferred appeal against the order of punishment dated 12.09.2018 under Annexure-11.¶¶36
Prior proceeding
Chairman-cum-Appellate Authority allowed the appeal against the order dated 12.09.2018; order of punishment set aside vide order dated 27.05.2020 under Annexure-13.¶¶36
Prior proceeding
Prayer refers to W.P.(C) No.20494 of 2021, disposed of on dt.26.07.2021, concerning juniors promoted despite the Petitioner's name being listed above them in the gradation list.¶¶25
Prior proceeding
Petitioner retired from service w.e.f. 27.04.2022 on attaining the age of superannuation.¶¶39
Prior proceeding
Seeking refund of amounts deducted towards penalty, Petitioner filed W.P.(C) No.6614 of 2022; disposed of on 18.06.2024 directing OSIC to refund the deducted amount with interest.¶¶39
Prior proceeding
Immediate trigger of the present petition: alleged non-extension of retiral benefits due and admissible to the Petitioner.¶¶39