Orissa High Court
Sri Santosh Kumar Das vs State Of Odisha & Another on 17 October, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WPC(OA) No.2533 of 2018
Sri Santosh Kumar Das .... Petitioner
Mr. Nihal Rath, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha & Another .... Opposite Parties
Mr. L. Samantaray,
Addl. Govt. Advocate
CORAM:
JUSTICE M.S. RAMAN
ORDER
Order No. 17.10.2022
01. 1. The Original Application No.2533 of 2018 was filed before
the State Administrative Tribunal, Bhubaneswar. After its abolition,
the same has been transferred to this Court which is renumbered as
WPC(OA) No.2533 of 2018.
2. The Petitioner, Assistant Engineer (Civil), though was
granted Revised Assured Career Progression (RACP) after serving
of 20 years is aggrieved by fixation of Pay Band at Rs.4,800/- vide
order dated 7th April, 2016 issued from the Office of the Engineer-
in-Chief, Water Resources, Bhubaneswar. Said office order has
mentioned about decision of the Screening Committee of Office of
Engineer-in-Chief, Water Resources regarding the eligibility of the
Petitioner and allowed the second financial up-gradation under
Revised Assured Progression Scheme and Pay Band-2, in the scale
of pay Rs.9,300/- - Rs.34,800/- + Enhanced Grade Pay of
Rs.4,800/- on completion of 20 years of qualifying services in the
// 2 //
entry grade with effect from 24th January, 2013 in view of Rule 13
of Odisha Revised Scale of Pay Rules, 2008.
3. The Petitioner is aggrieved by such alleged erroneous
fixation of Pay Band and the counsel for the Petitioner submitted
that instead of fixing Pay Band-2 at Rs.5,400/- , the authority has
fixed it at Rs.4,800/- which is incompatible. To buttress such a
contention, the counsel for the Petitioner relied on a decision of the
Odisha Administrative Tribunal being Ashok Kumar Palo vs. State
of Odisha & Others in O.A. No. 2237 of 2014. Vide order dated 3rd
April, 2017, the said Tribunal has extended the benefit on the
identical prayer as is made in the present writ petition. It is
submitted, that the petitioner, being similarly circumstanced
employee, is required to be extended the similar benefit. The
operative part of the said order of the Tribunal reads as follows:-
"Consequently, the order fixing the Grade Pay of
Rs.5,400/- be restored, and consequential action be taken
within a period of three months from the date of receipt of
copy of this order."
4. Counsel for the Petitioner further submitted that this Court
in State of Odisha and another Vrs. Bihari Lal and others, W.P.(C)
No.2831 of 2016 disposed of on 27.06.2016 accepted the fixation of
Pay Band and Grade Pay at Rs.5,400/-. In the case of Bipin Bihari
Nayak Vrs. State of Odisha, W.P.(C) No.36653 of 2021, disposed of
on 23.11.2021 this Court following aforesaid case observed as
follows:
"xxx
// 3 //
3. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking direction
to opposite party no.1 to take effective steps with extend to financial
upgradation under 2nd and 3rd RACP with grade pay of Rs.5400/-
and Rs.6600/- on the basis of the judgment dated 27.06.2016
passed by this Court in W.P.(C) NO.2831 of 2016 (State of Odisha
v. Biharilal Barik) which has been confirmed by the apex Court in
Diary No.(S) 20358 of 2017 within a stipulated period.
4. In course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner
states that highlighting the grievances, the petitioner has made
representation to opposite party no.1 vide Annexure-5 and the same
may be directed to be disposed of keeping in view the judgment in
State of Odisha and another v. Bihari Lal and others (W.P.(C)
No.2831 of 2016 disposed of on 27.06.2006) which has been
confirmed by the apex Court in Diary No.(S) 20358 of 2017 within
a stipulated time.
5. Considering the limited grievance of the petitioner, this
Court without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,
disposes of the writ petition directing opposite party No.1 to
consider the representation filed by the petitioner vide Annexure-5
and pass appropriate order in accordance with law keeping in view
the judgment in Bihari Lal (supra) within a period of three months
from the date of production of certified copy of this order."
5. Mr. L. Samantaray, Addl. Govt. Advocate submitted that
the appropriate course to resolve the dispute would be to relegate
the Petitioner to approach the Opposite Party No.1-Secretary to
Govt., Water Resources Department who may be directed to decide
the grievance of the petitioner.
6. In view of the aforesaid submission and taking into
consideration the decisions of this Court, interest of justice would
be best met, in directing the Petitioner to approach with
representation within a period of 30 days to the Opposite Party
No.1-Secretary to Govt. Water Resources, Department along with
certified copy of this order and cite the relevant decisions. It is
// 4 //
directed that the Opposite Party No. 1 shall decide the grievance of
the Petitioner within a period of two months thereafter and
communicate reasoned order to the Petitioner.
7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ
petition stands disposed of.
(M.S. Raman)
Judge
Aks
