Bhagabat Mohanty vs State Of Odisha & Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 8720 Ori

               2IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                               WP(C) NO.24597 OF 2021

             Bhagabat Mohanty                          ....               Petitioner

                                                            Mr.J.Gupta, Advocate

                                          -versus-


             State of Odisha & Ors.                    ....         Opposite Parties

                                                                  Mr.D.Mohapatra,
                                                                  Standing Counsel

                       CORAM:
                       JUSTICE BISWANATH RATH
                                         ORDER

23.08.2021 Order No.01

1. This Writ Petition involves the following prayer:

"The petitioner therefore humbly prays that the Hon'ble Court may be graciously pleased to admit this case, issue notice to opposite parties for show cause and after hearing both the sides may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus/certiorari by directing the opposite parties particularly to O.P.Nos.2 to 3 to take immediate steps to disburse the differential arrear salary as well as the current monthly salary in trained graduate Scale of Pay from the date of attaining the age of 48 year on the basis of the .SM.E. Department. Resolution dated 18.02.2008 and Letter No.6259 dt.16.4.2010 as well as the Letter No.1772 dt.11.1.2011 of the Director of Secondary Education, Odisha and the Rules vide Annexure-4, 5 & as well as order passed in the case of Radharani Samal-vrs-State & others, reported in (2017) (I) ILR-CUT-546 as well as the order dated 30.04.2019 in W.A. No.176/2017 by quashing the illegal order of the present O.P. No.1 vide Annexure-9 within a stipulated period with cost."

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that similar question has already been adjudicated by the learned Single Judge in Radharani Samal vrs.

// 2 //

State of Orissa, 2017(I) ILR-CUT-546, which has been affirmed by the Division Bench of this Court by dismissing Writ Appeal No.176 of 2017 preferred by the State vide order dated 30.04.2019. Therefore, the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment passed by this Court in Radharani Samal (supra).

3. Learned Standing Counsel for the School and Mass Education Department admits the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner. He contended that direction may be issued to consider the case of the petitioner in the light of judgment passed by this Court in Radharani Samal (supra), which has been affirmed by the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 30.04.2019 by dismissing Writ Appeal No.176 of 2017 preferred by the State.

4. Considering the contentions raised by learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, this Court disposes of the writ petition directing the opposite parties to consider the case of the petitioner in the light of the ratio decided by this Court in Radharani Samal (supra) as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two months from the date of communication of copy of this order by the petitioner but however taking care of the direction of this Court dated 03.11.2020, passed in W.P.(C) No.22706 of 2020. In the event payment involving petitioner is not released within two months, it shall carry interest @7% per annum for the period of delay and the interest component shall be recovered from the person responsible for such delay.

(Biswanath Rath) Judge M.K.Rout