The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.29865 of 2023 Bhagirathi Sahoo …. Petitioner Mr. L Rayatsingh, Advocate State of Odisha & Others -versus- …. Opposite Parties Mr.B.P. Tripathy, AGA Mr. S.K. Patra, Adv. for O.P.5 CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER 10.04.2024 Order No. 13. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode.
Facts
2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties. 3. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 21.02.2024, learned Addl. Government Advocate produced the instruction so issued by the DEO, Gajapati enclosing copy of the letter dtd.04.03.2024 issued by the Government in the Department of School & Mass Education.
Legal Reasoning
before this Court in W.P.(C) No.2041 of 2008. 5.1. It is contended that the Writ Petition filed by the State in W.P.(C) No.2041 of 2008 was dismissed vide order dtd.12.01.2015 under Annexure-13 on the ground of non-removal of defects. Even after dismissal of the writ petition on 12.01.2015, the pensionary benefits of the Page 2 of 6 // 3 // Petitioner were not released in spite of several approach and ultimately the present writ petition was filed inter alia with the following prayer:- “In the light of the above facts and circumstances Your Lordship may graciously be pleased to allow this petition by directing the Opp. Parties to disburse all the pension and other retirement benefits to the petitioner within a stipulated time period, for justice”. 5.2. It is contended that pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 21.09.2023 and subsequent orders passed in the present writ petition, Petitioner was released with a sum of Rs.52,91,209/- towards his final pension in the month of January, 2024 and the gratuity amount as per the instruction provided by the Department has been adjusted towards the dues admissible to HUDCO and with a further direction to recover a sum of Rs.8,626/- from the TI components of the Petitioner’s pension. 5.3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that since Petitioner retired from his service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.07.2002 and the order of punishment imposed in the proceeding was quashed by the Tribunal vide order dtd.04.04.2007, there was no occasion on the part of the Opposite Parties in not releasing the pensionary benefits of the Petitioner, which was ultimately released amounting to Rs.52,51,209/- in the month of January, 2024. 5.4. It is accordingly contended that for such delayed payment of the pensionary benefits for the period starting from disposal of the Original Application vide order Page 3 of 6 // 4 // dtd.04.04.2007, Petitioner became entitled to get interest from the said date till it was so disbursed. 5.5. It is accordingly contended that appropriate order be passed allowing interest as due and admissible for such delayed payment of pensionary benefits for the period starting from the date of disposal of the matter by the Tribunal i.e. 04.04.2007 till it was released in the month of January, 2024. 6. Learned Addl. Government Advocate on the other hand to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the Petitioner, contended that since by the time Petitioner retired from service a proceeding was pending against him, pensionary benefits were not released save and except sanctioning provisional pension. Even though the Tribunal quashed the order of punishment vide order dtd.04.04.2007 under Annexure-12 since the State challenged the same by filing W.P.(C) No.2041 of 2008, because of the pendency of the writ petition, the pensionary benefits were also not released. However, after filing of the present writ petition and pursuant to the order passed by this Court, pensionary benefits have been released in the month of January, 2024. It is accordingly contended that no fault lies with the Department for such delayed payment of the pensionary benefits and Petitioner is not entitled to get interest as is being claimed. 7. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made, this Court Page 4 of 6 // 5 // finds that Petitioner retired from his service on attainting the age of superannuation on 31.07.2002. Petitioner on the ground of pendency of a proceeding was not released with his pensionary benefits save and except provisional pension. As found from the record, the punishment imposed against the Petitioner in the proceeding on 28.05.2003 under Annexure-7 were challenged before the Tribunal in O.A. No.391 of 2007. The Tribunal vide order dtd.04.04.2007 quashed the order of punishment and allowed the application. Even after quashing of the order of punishment, the pensionary benefits were not released on the ground that a writ petition has been filed before this Court in W.P.(C) No.2041 of 2008. 7.1. As found from the record the writ petition was dismissed on the ground of non-removal of the defects on
Arguments
4. Basing on the letter issued by the Government, Mr. B.P. Tripathy, learned Addl. Government Advocate contended that since the Petitioner had to pay a sum of Rs.1,19,999/- towards his loan due to HUDCO, the gratuity amount of the Petitioner to that extent has been // 2 // adjusted and the Petitioner has nothing to receive towards his retirement gratuity. 4.1. It is also contended that with regard to some audit objection and after adjustment of Rs.3,526/-, Petitioner is now liable to pay a sum of Rs.8,624/- for which Accountant General has been requested to recover the same from the TI component of his pension. 5. To the submission made by learned Addl. Government Advocate on such instruction, learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that Petitioner in the present case retired from service on attainting the age of superannuation on 31.07.2002. On the ground of pendency of a proceeding, the retirement benefits of the Petitioner were not released. Subsequently when the Petitioner was imposed with the punishment in the said proceeding vide office order dtd.28.05.2003 under Annexure-7 the matter was challenged before the Tribunal in O.A No.391/2007. The Tribunal vide order dtd.04.04.2007 under Annexure-12 though quashed the order of punishment, but thereafter also the pensionary benefits of the Petitioner were never released on the plea that the order passed by the Tribunal is under challenge
Decision
12.01.2015. Even after dismissal of the writ petition, the pensionary benefits were never released till it was released in the month of January, 2024 pursuant to the order passed by this Court in the present writ petition. 7.2. In view of such admitted position, this Court is of the view that Petitioner is eligible and entitled to get interest @ 6 % on the retirement benefits so released amounting to Rs.52,91,209/- for the period from 04.04.2007 to the date of release in January, 2024. Opposite Party Nos.2 and 3 are directed to calculate the entitlement of the Petitioner towards interest as directed by this Court hereinabove and release the same in favour of the Petitioner after adjustment of Rs.8,626/- within a Page 5 of 6 // 6 // period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of this order. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Subrat Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBRAT KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 15-Apr-2024 17:34:04 Page 6 of 6