The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No. 15592 of 2024 Patitapaban Nayak ..... State of Odisha & Ors. -versus- ..... CORAM: Petitioner Mr. L.K. Mohanty, Advocate Opposite Parties Mr. P.K. Panda, ASC THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
Decision
ORDER 31.01.2025 Order No. 07 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard Mr. L.K. Mohanty, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Mr. P.K. Panda, learned Addl. Standing Counsel appearing for the Opp. Parties. 3. The present writ petition has been filed inter alia challenging order dtd.29.02.2024 so passed by Opp. Party No. 3 under Annexure-10. Vide the said order claim of the Petitioner to get the benefit of Grade Pay Rs.5400/- in the shape of 3rd RACP has been rejected. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that earlier claiming the benefit Petitioner was before this Court in W.P.C.(OAC) No. 3799 of 2017. It is contended that claim of the Petitioner being similar to an order passed by the Tribunal on 19.06.2017 in O.A. No. 2259(C) of 2015, the writ petition was disposed of vide order dt.21.12.2022 basing on the concession made by the learned State Counsel therein that Petitioner’ claim is covered by order dtd.19.06.2017 in O.A. No. 2259 of 2015. This Court directed Opp. Page 1 of 4. Party No. 3 to take a fresh decision on the Petitioner’s claim in the light of the order passed in O.A. No. 2259(C) of 2015, so disposed of on 19.06.2017. 4.1. It is contended that even though learned State Counsel appearing in W.P.C.(OAC) No. 3799 of 2017 fairly contended that case of the Petitioner is covered under order dtd.19.06.2017 so passed in O.A. No. 2259(C) of 2015, but claim of the Petitioner was rejected basing on some instructions provided by the Department, vide the impugned order dtd.29.02.2024. 4.2. It is also contended that order passed in O.A. No. 2259(C) of 2015 has been duly complied with by the Govt. vide order dtd.07.08.2018 under Annexure-8. It is accordingly contended that since it was fairly admitted by the State Counsel in the earlier writ petition that claim of the Petitioner is covered by the order passed in O.A. No. 2259(C) of 2015 and the said order has been implemented in the meantime vide order under Annexure-8, there was no occasion to reject the Petitioner’s claim vide the impugned order dtd.29.02.2024 under Annexure-10. It is accordingly contended that the impugned order is not sustainable in the eye of law. 5. Mr. P.K. Panda, learned Addl. Standing Counsel on the other hand basing on the stand taken in the counter affidavit contended that after receipt of the order in W.P.C.(OAC) No. 399 of 2017, clarification was sought for from the Govt. for compliance of order dtd.21.12.2022. But Govt. issued the clarification inter alia indicating therein that since claim of the Petitioner for RACP benefit has already been rejected vide Department letter dtd.22.06.2017, it cannot be reopened. Such instruction provided by the Govt. under Annexure-C/3 reads as follows:- Page 2 of 4. “To The District Education Officer Kandhamal Sub:- WPC (OAC) No. 3799/2017, filed by Patitapaban Nayak Vrs State of Odisha & others. Ref- Your letter No. 1677 dt.09.03.2023 Sir, In inviting a reference to the subject noted above, I am directed to say that you have requested in your letter No. 1677 dt.09.03.2023 to enlighten regarding eligiblity of grade pay on 3rd RACP in favour of the Petitioner w.e.f.01.01.2013 as per F.D resolution dated 06.02.2013 under Anx-7 & 8 and as per Hon’ble Court order dated 21.12.2022 of the Hon’ble High Court passed in the WP(C) No. 3799/2017 for compliance. Accordingly, the matter has been referred to Govt. Through OSWAS for kind issue of suitable instruction in the matter. Now the Govt. have returned back the same in OSWAS vide file No. DSFO-FEV-HEST-0001-2023 with a request to consider as per the observation of Finance section (Sheet Attached). In view of the above, your are therefore requested to consider the claim of the petitiioenr perusing the observation of Finance section and comply accordingly under instruction to this Directorate as well as Govt. This may be treated as most urgent.” 5.1. It is contended that on the face of the order passed by this Court 21.12.2022, taking into account the clarification issued by the Govt. under Annexure-C/3 on dtd.21.02.2024, claim of the Petitioner has been rejected vide the impugned order dtd.29.02.2024 under Annexure-10. 6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made, this Court finds that claiming Page 3 of 4. benefit of Grade Pay Rs.5400/- in the shape of 3rd RACP, Petitioner was before this Court in W.P.C.(OAC) No. 3799 of 2017. Placing reliance on an order passed by the Tribunal on 19.06.2017 in O.A. No. 2259(C) of 2015, learned counsel for the Petitioner when contended that Petitioner is covered by the said order, opportunity was given to the learned State Counsel to verify such nature of contention. 6.1. Basing on the submission made by the learned State Counsel that claim of the Petitioner is covered by the order passed in O.A. No. 2259(C) of 2015, the writ petition was disposed of by this Court vide order dtd.21.12.2022 under Annexure-9. As further found, order passed in O.A. No. 2259(C) of 2015 has already been implemented vide order dtd.07.08.2018 under Annexure-8. 6.2. In view of such position, it is the view of this Court that the ground on which Petitioner’s claim has been rejected is not sustainable in the eye of law. Therefore, this Court is inclined to quash order dtd.29.02.2024 so passed by Opp. Party No. 3 under Annexure-10. While quashing the said order, this Court directs Opp. Party No. 3 to extend the benefit in the light of the order passed in O.A. No. 2259(C) of 2015 in favour of the Petitioner, which has been implemented vide Annexure-8. This Court directs Opp. Party No. 3 to extend the benefit as due and admissible with passing of an order in that regard within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of this order. 7. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. (BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SNEHANJALI PARIDA Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 03-Feb-2025 11:04:52 Sneha Page 4 of 4.