Nishiranjan Pattnaik vs State Of Odisha And Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 10758 Ori

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                  W.P.(C) No. 31151 of 2021

             Nishiranjan Pattnaik                   ....                    Petitioners
                                                                    Mr. A.K. Das, Adv.
                                               -Versus -
             State of Odisha and others                             Opposite Parties
                                                     ....

Addl. Govt. Advocate

CORAM:

DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI

ORDER_ 07.10.2021

Order No. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

01.

2. The petitioner has filed this application seeking direction to opposite parties to modify the wrong fixatin of pay of the petitoner made by the Collector, Subarnapur and BDO, Sonpur vide annexure- 9 series and direct to fix up pay of the petitioner taking into account grade p[ay of Rs.5400 on completion of 30 years of service in the post of VLW/PEO w.e.f. 18.03.2017 under 3rd MACP in Level-12, Cell-1 at Rs.56,100/- in correct interpretation of provisions under Rule 13 (ii) read with 13 (V) of ORSP Rules, 2017 under Annexure-8.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that similar question had come up for consideration before a Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No. 2831 of 2016 disposed of on 27.06.2016 (State of Odisha and another v. Bihari Lal and others), which was arising out of an order dated 12.03.2015 passed by the State Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 520 of 2014 and this Court quashed the order dated 21.12.2013 (wrongly mentioned as 21.12.2012 in the judgment) and held that the applicants are eligible to get financial upgradation in the posts of GPEO/PA, ABDO/SDPO and DPO on completion of 10/20/30 years of service in the post of VLW under

the RACP scheme. Therefore, the petitioner's case may be considered in the light of the said judgment.

4. Learned Addl. Government Advocate states that if the Division Bench of this Court has resolved the issue, then the petitioner may approach the authority concerned ventilating his grievance.

5. Considering the contentions raised by learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, this Court grants liberty to the petitioner to approach the authority concerned by filing representation brining the notice of the authority the judgment in Bihari Lal (supra), to which the authority shall apply his mind and pass appropriate order within a period of four months from the date of communication of this order.

With the above observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.

(Dr. B.R. Sarangi) Judge A.K. Rana