Orissa High Court
Khiraprava Acharya vs State Of Odisha And Ors on 25 August, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.24843 of 2021
Khiraprava Acharya .... Petitioner
Mr. B.N. Parida,
Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and Ors. .... Opp. Parties
Mr.Biplab Mohanty,
Standing Counsel for S.&. M.E.
CORAM:
JUSTICE BISWANATH RATH
ORDER
25.08.2021
Order No.
03. 1. Heard Mr.B.N. Parida, learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned Mr.Biplab Mohanty, learned Standing Counsel for School &
Mass Education Department.
2. This writ petition involves the following prayer:
"In the facts and circumstances of the case the humble
petitioner fervently prays this Hon'ble Court to be graciously
pleased to issue notice to the Opp. Parties, call for relevant
records and after hearing the Counsel of parties, issue a writ
in the nature of Mandamus commanding Opp. Parties to
disburse differential arrear salary and current salary in
trained graduate scale of pay to the petitioner on attending
48 years, i.e. w.e.f. 09.06.2021 in terms of the decision
rendered by this Hon'ble Court in the case of Radharani
Samal Vs. State of Odisha & Ors (W.P.(C) No.18908 of
2013) within the stipulated time.
And/or pass such other order or direction as deems fit
and proper in the interest of justice;
And for this act of your kindness, the humble petitioner
shall as in duty bound, ever pray."
// 2 //
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that similar
question has already been adjudicated by the learned Single Judge in
Radharani Samal -Vrs- State of Orissa, reported in 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).
4. Learned Standing Counsel for School and Mass Education
Department admits the contentions raised by 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.
5. 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
// 3 //
period of delay and the interest component shall be recovered from
the person responsible for such delay.
6. Writ Petition thus stands disposed of.
(Biswanath Rath)
Judge
U.K.Sahoo
