Lakshmikanta Satapathy … v. Mohapatra
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.23602 of 2015 Lakshmikanta Satapathy …. Petitioner Mr. V. Mohapatra, Advocate on behalf of Mr. A.K. Mohapatra, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. …. Opposite Parties Mr. S. Rath, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
Decision
ORDER 13.03.2024 Order No 06. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard Mr. V. Mohapatra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. A.K. Mohapatra, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. S. Rath, learned Addl. Standing Counsel appearing for the Opp. Parties. 3. Petitioner has filed the present writ petition inter alia challenging order dtd.25.06.2011 so passed by the Govt.-Opp. Party No. 1 under Annexure-1. Vide the said order Petitioner though was allowed the benefit of selection grade scale of pay w.e.f.01.07.1973, but the same since was extended on notional basis, Petitioner is before this Court challenging the same. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that in the gradation list of PETs so issued by the authorities in respect of Ganjam district one K.C. Mohapatra was at Sl. No. 1 and the present Petitioner was at Sl. No. 2. The said K.C. Mohapatra though was // 2 // extended with the benefit of selection grade scale of pay vide order dtd.26.05.1991 of the Govt. , but the same when was not extended in favour of the Petitioner, Petitioner approached this Court in OJC No. 4853 of 1997. This Court vide order dtd.03.04.2001 disposed of the writ petition inter alia with the following order:- “Heard Shri A.K.Mohapatra, the petitioner and Sri S. Das, learned Addl. Governmet Advocate for the state. learned counsel for The petitioner has prayed for a direction to the opposite parties to grant him Selection Grade Scale of pay with effect from 1.7.1973 in terms Annex 1 and 2. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as P.E.T. and joined service 25.4.1960 in S.K.S. High School at Nimkhandi in the district of Ganjam. A decision was taken in Annexure-1 to convert 40 posts of P.E.Ts. at the rate of 1% ‰% (twelve half) of the permanent and temporary posts which were continued for three years or more and which are at present given the scale of Rł.115/- to Rs.180/- and Rs.100/- to Rs.155/ and for payment of selection grade in the scale of Rs.185/- to Rs.325/- This discussion was taken on 28th May, 1973. Pursuant to the aforesaid decision, one K.C.Mohapatra who was occupying No.1 position in the gradation list of P.E.TS. in Ganjam district was given benefit of selection grade scale of pay by order of the State Govt. dated 26.5.1991. The petitioner who occupies second position in the gradation list, submitted a representation for allowing him selection grade as per the decision of the State Government in Annexure-1 and his case was also recommended by the Inspector of Schools, Opposite Party No. 3 for consideration along with the aforesaid Sri. K.C. Mohapatra, who was working as P.E.T. in G.T. High School, belaguntha. xxxx No decision having been taken on the representation of the petitioner as well as the recommendation of the Inspector of Schools this writ application has been filed. Sri Mohapatra. learned counsel for the Petitioner brought to the notice of the Court the order dated 29.1.1995 passed in O.J.C. No. 8874 of 1995 in the case of Kailash Chandra Sahoo and submitted that pursuant to the order of this Court, the sald Kailash Page 2 of 5 // 3 // Chandra Sahoo has also been given the benefit of selection grade scale of pay. Since the grievance of the petitioner is limited, after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I dispose of this writ application directing the opposite parties 1 and 2 to consider the case of the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the order and pass necessary orders with regard to grade scale of pay in terms of the decision of the State Govt. in Annexure-1. The decision of the State Govt. with regard to grant of selection grade scale of pay to Sri K.C. Mohapatra and Sri Kailash Chandra Sahoo shall also be referred by the opposite parties while considering the case of the petitioner and if the petitioner stands in the same footing, benefits shall not be denied to him. Requisites for communication order shall be filed within three days. Urgent certified copy be granted proper application only after, filing requisites.” 4.1. It is contended that this Court directed Opp. Party No. 1 to take a decision on the claim of the Petitioner taking into account the benefit extended in favour of aforesaid K.C. Mohapatra as well as in favour of one Kailash Chandra Sahoo. Taking into account the same, Petitioner was also extended with the benefit of selection grade scale of pay w.e.f.01.07.1973, but that was only extended on notional basis on the ground that Petitioner is a retired employee having retired from service w.e.f.31.03.1998. 4.2. It is contended that since Petitioner is similarly situated as like K.C. Mohapatra, who got the benefit in terms of the order passed by the Govt. on 26.03.1991 w.e.f.01.07.1973, Petitioner being similarly situated should have been extended with the said benefit while in service. But when that was not extended in his favour, he approached this Court in OJC No. 4853 of 1997. This Court though directed for consideration of his claim in the light of the benefit extended in favour of K.C. Mohapatra as well as K.C. Sahoo and Page 3 of 5 // 4 // Petitioner was also extended with the same w.e.f.01.07.1973, but that should not have been on notional basis. It is accordingly contended that the order passed under Annexure-1 so far as it relates to extension of the benefit on notional basis is not sustainable in the eye of law. 5. Mr. S. Rath, learned Addl. Standing Counsel on the other hand while supporting the impugned order made his submission basing on the stand taken in the counter affidavit. It is contended that since by the time the writ petition was disposed of by this Court on 03.04.2001, Petitioner had retired w.e.f.31.03.1998, the benefit was extended in his favour w.e.f.01.07.1973 on notional basis. By extending the benefit on notional basis, Petitioner’s pension and other pensionary benefits have been revised and he has got the benefit. It is accordingly contended that there is no illegality or irregularity with the order dtd.25.06.2011 under Annexure-1 so far as it relates to extension of the benefit on notional basis. 6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties, considering the submissions made and the materials placed before this Court, it is found that benefit of selection grade scale of pay was allowed in favour of one K.C. Mohapatra vide order issued by the Govt. on 26.05.1991. Since there is no dispute that K.C. Mohapatra was at Sl. No. 1 of the gradation list of P.E.T. in the district of Ganjam and the Petitioner was at Sl. No. 2, it is the view of this Court that after extension of the benefit in favour of K.C. Mohapatra vide order dtd.26.05.1991, the benefit should have been extended in favour of the Petitioner without forcing him to approach this Court in filing the writ petition. Page 4 of 5 // 5 // 6.1. It is also found that this Court vide order dtd.03.04.2001 in OJC No. 4853 of 1997 though directed Opp. Parties to consider the claim of the Petitioner taking into the benefit extended in favour of one K.C. Mohapatra and one K.C. Sahoo, but in terms of the said order, the benefit though was extended w.e.f.01.07.1973, but on notional basis. Since similar scale of pay with extension of the financial benefit was released in favour of K.C. Mohapatra as well as K.C. Sahoo, which is not disputed, this Court is of the view that Petitioner is also eligible and entitled to get the financial benefit w.e.f.01.07.1973. The direction contained in order dtd.25.06.2011 under Annexure-1 directing for extension of such benefit from 01.07.1973 on notional basis, as per the considered view of this Court is not sustainable in the eye of law. 6.1. Therefore, this Court is inclined to quash that part of the order dtd.25.06.2011 under Annexure-1, wherein the benefit has been extended on notional basis w.e.f.01.07.1973. While quashing the same, this Court held the Petitioner eligible and entitled to get the financial benefit for the period from 01.07.1973 till he attains the age of superannuation of 31.03.1998. While holding so, this Court directs Opp. Party No. 3 to calculate the arrear entitlement of the Petitioner for the period indicated hereinabove and disburse the benefit with a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of this order. 7. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SNEHANJALI PARIDA Designation: Sr. Stenographer Reason: Authentication Sneha Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 18-Mar-2024 10:15:09 (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Page 5 of 5