Allowed

Padma Charan Das v. Chairman,O.S.R.T.C.

Orissa HC27 Aug 2026WP(C)/2587/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment quashes the petitioner's termination and appellate order because mandatory enquiry provisions were not followed during pendency of a VRS application. The court directed the respondent to release VRS benefits with interest within three months.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of dismissal and appellate orders; direction to release VRS benefits with 6% interest within 3 months.

Padma Charan Das Vs Chairman,O.S.R.T.C. — Service and Employment | Orissa HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.2587 of 2004 CNR No.ODHC010290622004

¶3

Padma Charan Das …. Petitioner Mr. P.K. Mohapatra, Advocate

¶4

-versus-

¶5

Chairman-cum-MD, …. Opp. Parties OSRTC and Others Mr. A. Tripathy, Advocate for O.P. No.2 Mr. P.K. Sahoo, ASC

¶6

CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

ORDER

Order No

27.08.2026

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

¶11

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶12

3. Pursuant to order dated 10.08.2026, learned counsel appearing for Opp. Party No.2 fairly contended that during pendency of the petitioner’s VRS application and prior to its acceptance, petitioner though was terminated from his services vide order dated 01.09.2001 but no enquiry in terms of the provisions contained under Regulation 141 of the OSRTC Employees (Classification, Recruitment and Condition of Service) Regulations, 1978 was followed.

¶13

// 2 //

¶14

4. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer:-

¶15

“Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:-

¶16

i) quash the order of dismissal under Annexure-3 and the order passed by the Appellate Authority under Annexure-6;

¶17

ii) Direct/order the Opp. Parties No.1 and 2 to reinstate the petitioner in service forthwith with all consequential service and monetary;

¶18

iii) Pass such other order(s)/direction(s) as would deem fit and proper.”

¶19

5. Considering the submission made by learned counsel appearing for Opp. Party No.2 pursuant to order dated 10.08.2026 and since it is admitted that during pendency of the petitioner’s application to take VRS, he was terminated vide the impugned order dated 01.09.2001 without following the provisions contained under Regulation 141 of the Regulations, this Court is inclined to quash order dtd.01.09.2001, so passed under Annexure-3 by Opp. Party No.2 and so also the order passed in the appeal by the Appellate AuthorityOpp. Party No.1.

¶20

5. 1. While quashing both the orders, this Court directs Opp. Party-Corporation to calculate the benefit as due and admissible to the petitioner towards his VRS benefit at the relevant point of time and release the same along with interest @ 6% all through in favour of the petitioner within a period of 3(three) months from the date of receipt of this order.

¶21

Page 2 of 3

¶22

// 3 //

¶23

6. The Writ Petition stands disposed of.

¶24

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge

¶25

Basudev

¶26

Signature Not Verified

¶27

Digitally Signed Signed by: BASUDEV SWAIN Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 28-Aug-2026 18:29:43

¶28

Page 3 of 3

Padma Charan Das v. Chairman,O.S.R.T.C.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Padma Charan Das v. Chairman,O.S.R.T.C.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases