2 04.01.2021 This Matter Is Taken ... vs Standing Counsel For School And ...

                 W.P.(        C.M.P.
                                  W.P.(C)
                                     No.1360
                                          No.35515
                                             of 2015of 2020




2   04.01.2021               This matter is taken up through Video conferencing.
                             Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
                         Standing     Counsel      for    School     and    Mass      Education
                         Department.
                            The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking
                         direction to the opposite parties to regularize the past
                         services rendered by the petitioner from 12.01.2004 to
                         03.02.2010 as qualifying service keeping in view the
                         judgments of the apex Court in Secretary State of
                         Karnataka and Others v. Umadevi (3) and Others,
                         (2006) 4 SCC 1, as well as Harbans Lal v. The State
                         of Punjab and Ors., (CWP No. 2371 of 2010 decided on
                         31.08.2010) and also in the case of Jeewan Lata v.
                         State of Punjab and others (CWP No. 10238 of 2017
                         (O&M)      decided   on     10.05.2019)         and   to   bring   the
                         petitioner under old pension scheme as per Finance
                         Department      notifications        No.Pen-23/2001-          45865/F
                         dated 01.09.2001, No.44451/F dated 17.09.2005 and
                         circular no. 17114(255)/F PEN-7/07 dated 04.04.2007,
                         as well as Rule-18 Sub-Rule-(6) of the Orissa Civil
                         Service (Pension) Rules, 1992.
                             In course of hearing, learned counsel for the
                         petitioner highlighting the grievance of the petitioner
                         submits that petitioner has made a representation to the
                         opposite party no.1 vide Annexure-6, but no decision
                         has yet been taken.
                              Considering the limited grievance of the petitioner,
                         this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits
                         of the case, disposes of the writ petition directing the
                         opposite    party    no.1       to   take   a     decision    on   the
                         -2-




      representation filed by the petitioner vide Annexure-6
      and pass appropriate order in accordance with law within
      a   period   of   three   months    from     the   date   of
      communication of copy of this order by the petitioner.
          As   restrictions     are   continuing   for   Covid-19,
      petitioners may utilize the soft copy of this order
      available in the High Court's Website or print out thereof
      at par with certified copies in the manner prescribed vide
      Court's Notification No.4587 dated 25.3.2020.



                                      ..............................

Biswanath Rath,J sks