The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.36821 of 2022 K.Chinna Rao …. Petitioner Mr.Gopal Prasad Jena, Advocate -versus- Principal Secretary to Government, Commerce and Transport Department & others …. Opposite Parties Mr.A.P.Das, A.S.C. CORAM: JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA Order No.
Decision
ORDER 30.01.2024 02. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as the learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State. Perused the Writ Petition as well as the documents annexed thereto. 3. The present Writ Petition has been filed by the Petitioner with the following prayer: “In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is humbly therefore prayed that the Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit the writ application and issue RULE NISI calling upon the Opposite Parties no.1,2 & 3 to show cause as to why the writ application shall not be allowed and the service book of Late K.Jagannath Rao shall not be regularized and the service benefits including back wages from the period from 26.10.1991 to 30.6.1999 and arrear pension in favour of Late K.Jagannath Rao from 01.07.1999 to 30.10.2007 and family pension in favour of Kella Nagarattnam wife of late K.Jagannath Rao from 01.11.2007 till ate should not be released within stipulated period with interest at commercial rate a // 2 // dismissal order dated 26.10.1991 has been vacated by the learned Industrial Tribunal Bhubaneswar in I.D. Misc.Case No.45/91 and the OJC No.4512/95 filed by OSRTC has also been dismissed by the Hon’ble High Court on 03.01.2022 and late K.Kagannath Rao was an Ex-STS employee on deputation to OSRTC. to regularize the service book of And if the Opposite Parties fail to show cause or show insufficient cause, the said rule may please be made absolute and upon hearing the parties through their counsel, this Hon’ble Court be further pleased to issue appropriate writs in the nature of MANDAMUS or any other suitable writ/writs directing the Opposite Parties late K.Jagannath Rao and release the service benefits including back wages from the period from 26.10.91 to 30.0699 and arrear pension favour of Late K.Jagannath Rao from 01.07.99 to 30.10.07 and family pension in favour of Kella Nagaratnam wife of late K.Jagannath Rao from 01.11.2007 till ate within stipulated period with interest at commercial rate as dismissal order dt.26.10.1991 has been vacated by the learned Industrial Tribunal Bhubaneswar in I.D. Misc.Case No.45/91 and the OJC No.4512/95 filed by OSRTC has also been dismissed by the Hon’ble High Court on 03.01.2022 and late K.Jagannath Rao was an Ex-STS employee on deputation to OSRTC in And be further pleased to pass such other order/orders, direction/directions and/or writ/writs as it deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case;” It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the 4. father of the Petitioner, who was working as driver under OSRTC, Jeypore was placed under suspension pending initiation of a Disciplinary Proceeding. He further contended that the Petitioner was removed from service by order dated 26.10.1991 under Annexure-2 to the Writ Petition with a further direction to treat the period of suspension as such. Thereafter, the Management approached the // 3 // Industrial Tribunal by filing Industrial Dispute Misc.Case No.45 of 1991 against the father of the present Petitioner. The aforesaid Industrial Dispute Misc.Case No.45 of 1991 was finally heard and disposed of vide order dated 14.12.1993. On perusal of the final order under Annexure-4 to the Writ Petition, it appears that the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal has categorically observed that the removal of the Petitioner from service is not legal and justified and therefore, the Industrial Tribunal expressed his disapproval of such conduct of the Opposite Party-Corporation. The order dated 14.12.1993 under Annexure-4 was assailed before the Division Bench of this Court by filing OJC No.4512 of 1995. The said Writ Petition was kept pending for several decades before this Court. The same was listed before the then Hon’ble Chief Justice Bench. Vide order dated 03.01.2022 under Annexure-5 to the Writ Petition, the Writ Petition preferred by the Opposite Party Corporation was disposed of with the observation that “Considering that the Opposite Party-Workman has expired and no consequential action pursuant to the impugned order of the Tribunal has been taken thus far, the Court sees no purpose being served in keeping the present petition pending”. Accordingly, the Writ Petition was disposed of. Therefore, it was contended by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the order passed by the Industrial Tribunal was not interfered by the Division Bench while disposing of the Writ Petition. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that after the death of the father of the petitioner, the Petitioner and other family members are entitled to get pensionary benefit as is due and admissible to the father of the Petitioner particularly. It is further // 4 // contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the mother of the deceased employee K.Jagannath is still alive and is facing difficulties for her sustenance in absence of financial benefit being paid to her which is due and admissible to her late son. 6. Learned Additional Standing Counsel on the other hand contended that on perusal of the record, it appears that the Petitioner has not approached the Opposite Party-Corporation and instead approached this Court directly by filing the present Writ Petition. He further contended that the present Writ Petition has been filed with a prayer for grant of pensionary benefit as is due and admissible to K.Jagannath, former employee of the Corporation, who is no more. In the aforesaid factual backdrops, learned Additional Standing Counsel contended that the Petitioner be directed to approach the Corporation taking therein all the grounds along with all supporting documents. In such eventuality the Corporation is directed to dispose of the representation within a stipulated period of time. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties, on careful examination of the background facts of the present case as well as the materials on record, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the Writ Petition at the stage of admission by granting liberty to the Petitioner to approach the Opposite Party no.2-Corporation by filing a detailed representation along with supporting documents within a period of three weeks from today. In such eventuality, the Opposite Party no.2 shall do well to consider the representation of the Petitioner in accordance with law and keeping in view the order under Annexure-4 & 5 and accordingly take a final decision in the matter within six weeks from the date of presentation of // 5 // representation. It is made clear that in the event Opposite Party No.2 comes to a conclusion that the Petitioner or wife of the deceased employee is entitle to family pension then the same shall be sanctioned and disbursed in their favour within a period of six weeks from the date of taking such decision if there are no other legal impediments. 8. With the aforesaid observation, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. 9. 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 Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 03-Feb-2024 16:57:42