Abani Kanta Kanhar vs State Of Odisha And Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 1216 Ori

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                 W.P.(C) No.3261 of 2022


                 Abani Kanta Kanhar                    ....             Petitioner
                                                Mr. Gyanaranjan Sethi, Advocate

                                              -versus-

                 State of Odisha and others             ....    Opposite Parties
                                                    Mr. D. Mund, AGA for State,

                             CORAM:
                             JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA

                                            ORDER

Order No.                                  10.02.2022

    01.     1.      This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement
            (Virtual/Physical mode).

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. The sole grievance of the Petitioner in the present writ application is that the Authorities have not considered the enrolment of the Petitioner under the Orissa Civil Service (Pension) Rules, 1992. Aggrieved by such inaction, the Petitioner has submitted a representation to the Opposite Party No.1 on 15.11.2021. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the said representation is pending before Opposite Party No.1 for consideration.

4. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that law in this regard has been laid down by this Court in the case of Ananda Das vs. State of Odisha, (2014) Suppl.-1 OLR 754 and the ratio decided therein clearly applies to the fact of the present case.

// 2 //

5. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand submits that the Petitioner is not eligible to be enrolled under the OCS (Pension) Rules, 1992. However, he has no objection if a direction is given to Opposite Party No.1 to consider the representation of the Petitioner in the light of the judgment of this Court in the case of Ananda Das (supra).

6. In such view of the matter, this writ application is disposed of with a direction to Opposite Party No.1 to consider the representation of the Petitioner, if such representation is still pending within a period of six weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

7. It is needless to mention here that the authority shall consider the representation of the Petitioner in the light of the ratio decided in the case of Ananda Das (supra) and dispose of the same by passing a speaking and reasoned order. Decision so taken be communicated to the Petitioner within ten days thereafter.

8. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

9. With the aforesaid observation the writ application stands disposed of.

( A.K. Mohapatra) Judge

u.k. sahoo