Ritanjali Mishra & Another vs State Of Odisha & Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 8852 Ori

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                             W.P.(C) No.24983 of 2021
            Ritanjali Mishra & Another    ....                        Petitioners
                                                         Ms. K.Swain, Advocate

                                         -versus-

            State of Odisha & Others.     ....                 Opposite Parties
                                                      Mr.D.Mohapatra, Standing
                                                       Counsel, S & ME Deptt.



                    CORAM:
                    JUSTICE BISWANATH RATH
                                     ORDER

25.08.2021 Order No.

01. 1. Heard Mr.K.Swain, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.D.Mohapatra, learned Standing Counsel for School and Mass Education Department.

2. This writ petition involves the following prayer:

"Under the above circumstances, it is humbly prayed that the writ application be allowed;

And

a) a writ of mandamus or an appropriate writ be issued commanding the O.Ps. to allow the petitioners to avail the benefit of G.P.F. under the old rules so also a further declaration be made that they are covered by the Odisha Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1992 prior to its amendment by taking into account their initial date of appointment keeping in view the decisions held by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Harbans Lal V. the State of Punjab and Ors., (CWP No.2371 of 2010, decided on 31.08.2010) which has been upheld by the Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP(C) NO.23578 of 2012 [SLP(C)...CC No.17901 of 2011), disposed of on 30.07.2012 (State of Punjab and Ors. Vrs.

Harbans Lal) and also taking into account in the case of Jeewan Lata Vs. State of Punjab and Ors. (CWP No.10238 of 2017 (O&M),

// 2 //

decided on 10.05.2019), with all consequential benefits.

And

b) Any other order/orders or direction/directions be issued so as to give complete relief to the petitioner;

c) And for this act of kindness, the petitioner shall as in duty bound ever pray."

3. For the nature of relief sought for and for pendency of the representation at the instance of the petitioners, vide Annexure-4 on the selfsame grounds, this writ petition is not entertainable at this stage and the same stands disposed of directing opposite party no.1 to look into the request of the petitioners, vide Annexure-4 and take a lawful decision thereon and also the applicability of the judgment cited hereinabove, as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of one and half months from the date of communication of certified copy of this order so also copy of the writ petition by the petitioners.

(Biswanath Rath) Judge

sks