Orissa High Court
Sk. Niyaj Ali vs State Of Orissa And Others on 4 October, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P. (C) No. 21399 of 2016
Sk. Niyaj Ali .... Petitioner
Mr. S.C. Dash, Adv.
-Versus -
State of Orissa and others .... Opposite Parties
.
CORAM:
DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI
ORDER
04.10.2021
Order No. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. The petitioner has filed this application to extend the
benefit of enhancement of retirement age from 58 to 60 years from
the date the government has passed resolution, i.e., 21.10.2014,
which has been duly approved pursuant to resolution dated
30.03.2015 passed by the Board of Directors of the opposite party
corporation.
3. Mr. S.C. Dash, learned counsel for the petitioner states
that the petitioner is the employee of Odisha Tourism Development
Corporation Limited and he is to superannuate from service on
attaining the age of 58 years. But pursuant to resolution dated
28.06.2014 passed by the Government of Odisha in Finance
Department, by virtue of amendment made to Rule 71 of the
Odisha Service Code, the age of retirement of its employees has
been extended from 58 to 60 years. Such benefit has already been
made applicable to the employees of all State Public Sector
Undertakings pursuant to resolution dated 02.08.2014 passed by
the Public Enterprises Department, Government of Odisha subject
to the conditions imposed therein. In compliance of the said
resolution, the Board of Directors of the opposite party corporation
initially approved the proposal of enhancement of the age of
retirement on superannuation of its employees on 21.10.2014 and
sent it for Government approval. But the State Government on
30.01.2015 asked the corporation to revisit the proposal by the
Board vide letter dated 30.01.2015. Thereafter, the Board again
passed a resolution on 30.03.2015 enhancing the age of retirement
of its employees from 58 to 60 years, but it should be related back
to the date, when the resolution was passed by the Public
Enterprises Department, i.e., 02.08.2014. Instead of doing so, the
benefit enhancement of retirement age has been extended with
effect from the date the State Government approved such benefits,
i.e., on 27.06.2015 prospectively. To substantiate his contention, he
has placed reliance on the judgment 14.07.2015 passed by this
Court in WP(C) No. 9279 of 2015 (Premalata Panda v. State of
Odisha and another).
3. Learned counsel appearing for opposite party no.2
strenuously urged before this Court that even though as a matter of
principle the Board of Directors of the Corporation has extended
the retirement age from 58 to 60 years pursuant to minutes dated
30.03.2015, but that is to be made applicable from 27.06.2015, the
date on which the government approved the same and, as such, it
has to be extended prospectively and not retrospectively. As such,
the claim made by the petitioner that it should be made applicable
from 02.08.2014 is not admissible, as the Corporation had not
taken any decision to extend such benefit from that date. In such
view of the matter, he states that the relief sought by the petitioner
to extend the benefit of enhancement of retirement age from
02.08.2014 cannot be granted.
4. Considering the contention raised by learned counsel for
the parties and after going through the records, it appears that there
is no dispute that the petitioner will not be extended the benefit of
enhancement of retirement age from 58 to 60 years as per the
resolution dated 30.03.2015 passed by the Board of Directors of
the Corporation, as the same has been approved on 27.06.2015 by
the Government of Odisha in the Department of Tourism &
Culture (Tourism). But so far as the claim of the petitioner, that he
should be extended such benefit with effect from 02.08.2014 (the
date when the Public Enterprises Department of the Government
Odisha passed resolution), is concerned, similar question had come
up for consideration before this Court in WP(C) No. 9279 of 2015
(Premalata Panda v. State of Odisha and another) and this Court,
after elaborate discussion, decided the matter by judgment dated
14.07.2015. In such view of the matter, this writ application is
disposed of in the light of the judgment dated 14.07.2015 passed in
the case of Premalata Panda mentioned above.
5. With the above observation and direction, the writ
application stands disposed of.
Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.
Ashok (Dr. B.R. Sarangi)
Judge
