The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK Binod Kumar Padhy W.P.(C) 34243 of 2021 …. Mr.P.K.Mishra, Advocate Petitioner Order No. 03. -versus- State of Odisha and others
Legal Reasoning
…. Opposite Parties Mr. P.C.Das, A.S.C. CORAM: JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA
Decision
ORDER 20.02.2024 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State. Perused the Writ Petition as well as the documents annexed thereto. 3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the following prayer: “ It is prayed, therefore that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to i) ii) Admit and allow the writ petition; Issue RULE NISI calling upon the Opp. Parties to show cause as to why the Petitioner shall not be entitled for his pension and other retirement benefits such as Gratuity, Commuted Value of pension and unutilized leave salary along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum with effect from his due date; iii) And if the Opposite Parties fail to show cause or show insufficient cause, this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ(s)/order(s) directing the Opposite Parties to disburse pension and other retirement benefits // 2 // such as Gratuity, Commuted Value of pension and unutilized leave salary along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum with effect from the due date within a stipulated period of time; iv) Pass such other order(s), direction(s) as deem fit and proper to the facts and circumstances of the case to give complete relief to the Petitioner;” 4. It is submitted by Mr.Mishra, learned counsel for the Petitioner that being aggrieved by the inaction of the Opposite Parties in disbursing the pensionary and retiral benefit, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present Writ Petition. Further, it is contended by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that while the Petitioner was working as Superintending Engineer Level-I under the Government of Odisha. He was likely to be superannuated from service on 31.03.2020. However, a couple of week before the proposed date of retirement the Petitioner was entangled in a Vigilance case bearing G.R.Case No.08 of 2020 corresponding to Berhampur vigilance P.S.Case No.05 of 2020. On the basis of such vigilance case, the Petitioner was immediately placed under suspension. Thereafter while the Petitioner was continuing under suspension the Opposite Parties allowed him to superannuate from service with effect from 31.03.2020 pursuant to the order under Annexure-1 dated 29.04.2020. Learned counsel for the Petitioner also contended that till date no Charge Sheet has been filed in the vigilance Case. Therefore, it is presumed that the investigation has not been concluded. Learned counsel for the Petitioner referring to the judgment of this Court by a Division Bench in State of Odisha and others vs. Sushanta Chandra Sahoo and others reported in 2022 (Supp) OLR -447 submitted before this Court that the Hon’ble Division Bench by interpreting Rule 7(2)(C) and Explanation(b) // 3 // attached thereto of the OCS(Pension) Rule, 1992 have categorically held that a judicial proceeding shall be deemed to be instituted from the date when in a criminal proceedings on a complaint on report of a Police Officer the Magistrate takes cognizance. By referring to the aforesaid judgment, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that since the vigilance case was only instituted and no final Charge Sheet has been filed as of now. In view of the aforesaid provisions read with Explanation (b) it is presumed that no criminal proceeding is pending against the Petitioner. He also contended that any Disciplinary Proceeding was ever initiated against the Petitioner. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that by applying the law laid down in the case of State of Odisha and others vs. Sushanta Chandra Sahoo and others (supra) the Petitioner is entitled to the retiral as well as pensionary benefit as is due and admissible to him. 5. Learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State on the other hand contended that due to pendency of the aforesaid Vigilance case, the retiral as well as pensionary benefit of the Petitioner has been withheld. He further contended that he has no instruction with regard to the status of the Vigilance case as well as whether any Disciplinary Proceeding has been initiated against the Petitioner or not. In such factual background, learned Additional Standing counsel submitted that the Petitioner be directed to approach the Opposite Parties with a further direction to the Opposite Parties to consider the case of the Petitioner in accordance with law within a stipulated period of time. 6. Considering the submissions made by the earned counsel appearing for the parties, on a careful examination of the background facts as well as keeping in view the materials on record and the judgment of this Court in State of Odisha and others vs. Sushanta // 4 // Chandra Sahoo and others (supra), this Court deems it proper to dispose of the Writ Petition by directing the Petitioner to approach Opposite Party Nos. 1 & 2 to consider the case of the Petitioner for grant of service and pensionary benefit by taking into consideration the judgment of this Court in State of Odisha and others vs. Sushanta Chandra Sahoo and others (supra). In the event no Disciplinary Proceeding was initiated on the date of retirement and no Charge Sheet was filed in the Vigilance case as on 31.03.2020 i.e. the date on which the Petitioner has retired from service then the Opposite Parties by applying the ratio decided in the State of Odisha and others vs. Sushanta Chandra Sahoo and others (supra) the Opposite Parties shall take steps for sanction and disbursal of the dues as admissible to the Petitioner in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of communication of certified copy of this order under intimation to the Petitioner. 7. With the aforesaid observation, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. RKS ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: RAMESH KUMAR SINGH Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 23-Feb-2024 11:02:22