The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.16815 of 2022 Pravakar Sarangi …. Petitioner Mr. S.B. Mohanty, Advocate State of Odisha and Others -versus- …. Opposite Parties Mr. A.K. Pati, ASC Mr. S.K. Patra, Advocate for O.P. No.6 CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No.
Decision
ORDER 31.07.2025 09. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer:- “It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased:- i) ii) To admit this writ application. To quash the order of Govt. (Department of to Panchayati Raj) dtd.26.5.2022 and quash the letter dated 01.01.2020 issued by Sr. Accounts Officer, A.G., Odisha. iii) To direct the opposite parties more particularly Principal Secretary, Department of Panchayati Raj and Department of Finance) to accept the proposal and recommendation of the learned B.D.O., Nilagiri dtd.11.11.2019 (Annexure-5 Series) // 2 // regarding allotment of G.P.F Account and governing his official status as a pre-2005 appointee so as to draw the pensionary benefits under O.C.S. Pension Rules, 1992 keeping in view the confirming Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dtd.30.07.2012 passed in S.L.P. No.11570/2012 (Out of the Judgment dated 31.08.2010 passed in C.W.P. 2371/10 by the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab in reference to Article 141 and 142 of the Constitution of India with regard to the binding precedent of the judgment passed in Rem.” 4. It is contended that even though petitioner was taken as a regular employee vide office order dated 20.08.2015 so issued by the Govt. in the department of Panchayati Raj Department available under Annexure- G/1 to the counter affidavit, but when he was not allotted with the GPF Number to make him eligible to make GPF contribution and the same was rejected by the Accountant General (A & E), Odisha, Bhubaneswar vide his communication dated 01.01.2020 under Annexure-7, the same was challenged before this Court in W.P.(C) No.35922 of 2021. 4.1. It is contended that this Court vide order dated 24.11.2021, when directed for consideration of the petitioner’s claim so made in his representation under Annexure-9, the same was rejected on the ground that the petitioner is an employee under DRDA. 4.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that in view of the nature of order passed vide Notification dated 20.08.2015 under Annexure-G/1 wherein the petitioner was treated as a Junior Engineer in the Page 2 of 5 // 3 // department of Panchayati Raj, petitioner cannot be taken as an employee of DRDA. 4.3. It is further contended that after rejection of the petitioner’s claim vide order dated 26.05.2022 under Annexure-11, petitioner has been allotted with the GPF Number by the Accountant General vide his letter dated 12.03.2025 vide GPF Account No.21787. 4.4. It is accordingly contended that since petitioner has been allotted with the GPF Account No.21787 by the Accountant General vide his letter dated 12.03.2025, petitioner automatically became entitled to be covered under the Old Pension Rule. It is accordingly contended that in view of such development which has taken place during pendency of the Writ Petition, O.P. No.1 be directed to take a fresh decision on the petitioner’s claim to be covered under OCS(Pension) Rules, 1992. 5. Learned Addl. Standing Counsel on the other hand contended that since petitioner was originally engaged by DRDA and he continues to be an employee of DRDA, basing on the earlier order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.35922 of 2021 and while complying the order dated 24.11.2021, the order at Annexure-11 was passed, holding therein that petitioner is not entitled to be covered under the Old Pension Rules and under GPF Scheme. Page 3 of 5 // 4 // 5.1. It is however contended that if in the meantime petitioner has been covered under GPF Scheme with allotment of GPF Number vide letter dated 12.03.2025 so issued by the Accountant General, petitioner may raise his claim before O.P. No.1 for being covered under OCS(Pension) Rules, 1992. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the submissions made, this Court finds that petitioner after being taken as an employee under Panchayati Raj Department vide Notification dated 20.08.2015 under Annexure-G/1 when raised his claim to be allotted with the GPF Number, the same was rejected vide letter dated 01.01.2020 under Annexure- 7. Petitioner challenging the same, when approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.35922 of 2021, this Court directed O.P. No.1 to consider the petitioner’s grievance as made under Annexure-9. Prayer of the petitioner as made under Annexure-9 reads as follows:- “Hence Request your magnanimity and goodself to be generous enough to accord approval to the proposal of the Learned B.D.O., Remuna and necessary concurrence be given for allotment of G.P.F. A/c. to be governed under Old pension Scheme and for act of your kindness I shall be highly obliged before your Honour.” 6.1. It is however found that such claim of the petitioner was rejected vide the impugned order dated 26.05.2022 under Annexure-11. However, considering the fact that during pendency of the Writ Petition, petitioner has been allotted with the GPF Account No. vide letter dated 12.03.2025 of the Accountant General, this Court is of the Page 4 of 5 // 5 // view that petitioner’s claim requires a fresh consideration with regard to his entitlement to be covered under OCS(Pension) Rules, 1992. 6.2. This Court accordingly directs O.P. No.1 to take a fresh decision on the petitioner’s claim for his coverage under OCS(Pension) Rules, 1992. Such a fresh decision be taken within a period of 2 (two) months from the date of receipt of this order. Petitioner is permitted to provide a copy of this order along with the letter issued by the Accountant General on 12.03.2025 before O.P. No.1 for compliance. 7. The Writ Petition accordingly stands disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Basudev Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BASUDEV SWAIN Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 06-Aug-2025 18:53:47 Page 5 of 5