Orissa High Court
Shiba Prasad Biswal vs State Of Odisha & Ors on 21 September, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.24245 of 2022
Shiba Prasad Biswal .... Petitioner
-versus-
State of Odisha & Ors. .... Opposite Parties
COROM:
JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
ORDER
21.09.2022
Order No
01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode.
2. Heard Mr. S.K.Purohit, learned counsel for the
Petitioner and Mr. Ch.S.Mishra, learned Addl. Government
Advocate for the State- Opposite Parties.
3. The Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition
with the following prayer:-
" It is therefore, prayed that your Lordships
may be graciously pleased to admit this case,
issue notice on the Opp. Parties asking them
to show cause as to why the petitioner shall
not be allowed one increment earnt on
1.1.2009 and on hearing if the Opp. Parties
show no or insufficient reasons, then issue a
writ of mandamus or any other writ of
appropriate nature directing the Opp. Parties
to grant one increment for the year i.e. from
1.1.2008 to 31.12.2008 for the purpose of
pensionary benefit only with the further
direction to calculate the benefits admissible
to the Petitioner by 1.1.2009 to be paid by
revising the pension as due, within a
scheduled period".
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that
though the increment of the Petitioner false due in the 1st
January of each year, but he was not sanctioned with the
// 2 //
said increment as due on 1.1.2009 as he retired from
service on 31.12.2008.
5. Mr. Purohit, learned counsel for the Petitioner
submitted that since the Petitioner rendered his duty from
1.1.2008 to 31.12.2008 for a period of one year his
increment as due to on 1.1.2009 should have allowed in his
favour.
6. It is also submitted that seeking such extension of the
benefit though the Petitioner approached the Opposite Party
No.2 on 25.08.2021 under Annexure-2 and the said
representation has been forwarded to the Opposite Party
No.3 vide letter dated 02.07.2022 under Annexure-3, but
no decision has been taken on the same.
7. Mr. Purohit also brought to the notice of this Court a
judgment rendered by this Court on 30.07.2021 in W.P.(C)
No.17715/2020. In the said judgment, this Court in
Paragraph-18 has held as follows:-
"18. In view of the facts and law, as discussed above, this
Court is of the considered view that the petitioner, having
rendered service from 01.01.2019 to 31.12.2019 for a
period of 12 months and his increment having due on
01.01.2020 and he having stood at par with P.
Ayyamperumal (supra), is entitled to get the notional
increment for the year i.e. from 01.01.2019 to 31.12.2019
for the purpose of pensionary benefits only. Accordingly, it
is directed that the benefits admissible to the petitioner be
re-fixed taking into account the notional increment
admissible to the petitioner by 01.01.2020 and the same
should be paid as early as possible by revising the pension
as due, preferably within a period of 3(three) months from
the date of communication of this judgment.
Consequentially, the order dated14.07.2020 in Annexure-
3, whereby the representations of the petitioner have been
rejected, is liable to be quashed and is hereby quashed".
// 3 //
8. This Court from the pleadings found that the claim of
the Petitioner is squarely covered by the aforesaid decision
of this Court. In view of that the Opposite Party No.3 is
directed to take a decision on the claim of the Petitioner as
made in Annexure-2 and forwarded to him under
Annexure-3 within a period of one month from the date of
receipt of this order. The financial benefit as due ad
admissible be also released on such consideration of the
matter within a further period of one (1) month.
9. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the
Writ Petition is disposed of.
(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy)
Judge
Subrat
