Dhanurdar Champatiray @ vs State Of Odisha And Another .... ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 2899 Ori

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 2899 Ori
Judgement Date : 6 April, 2023

Orissa High Court

Dhanurdar Champatiray @ vs State Of Odisha And Another .... ... on 6 April, 2023

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                             W.P.(C) No.29229 OF 2022

            Dhanurdar Champatiray @              ....            Petitioner(s)
            D.D.Champatiray                                  Mr.S.Rout,Adv.



                                          -versus-


            State of Odisha and another          ....             Opp.Party(s)
                                                          Mr.S.P.Panda,AGA


                      CORAM:
                      JUSTICE BISWANATH RATH
                      JUSTICE M.S.SAHOO
                                      ORDER

06.04.2023 Order No.

10. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Parties.

2. This Writ Petition involves the following prayer:-

<It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari quashing the decision of the opposite party no.3 under Annexure-9;

To issue a writ of mandamus directing the Opposite Party No.3 to consider the representation of the petitioner under Annexure-6 in terms of the judgment of this Hon'ble Court in Mahesh Prasad Mishra vs. State of Orissa & Ors. Reported in 2012 (Supp. I) OLR 1035 and reimburse the enhanced differential amount of minimum wages to the petitioner;

To issue RULE NISI;

And may pass any other order(s) and direction(s) as would be deemed just and proper by this Hon'ble Court;

And for this act of kindness, the Petitioner shall as in duty bound ever pray.=

// 2 //

3. This is in second round of litigation. In the first round of

litigation, this Court in disposal of Writ Petition vide W.P.(C)

No.2308 of 2020 by order dated 20.02.2020 gave direction to

Opposite Party No.3 therein to dispose of the representation of the

Petitioner to be filed by him along with documents. It is claimed that

the representation being filed along with genuine or required

documents, the representation has been rejected impugned herein.

4. Notice being served, the contesting opposite Parties brings a

counter affidavit disclosing their reasons in rejection of the

representation of the Petitioner impugned herein vide paragraph-4

has detailed herein below:-

<4. That, we the selfsame prayer the petitioner had earlier filed W.P.(C) No.2308/2020 for reimbursement of enhanced differential amount of minimum wages, which was disposed of by this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 20.2.2020 with a direction to the Opp. Party No.3 to dispose of the representation of the petitioner (to be filed by him along with documents). The petitioner submitted representation on 28.4.2022 without genuine/required documents, such as;

(i) Labour Registration Certificate. As per R.D. Department Memorandum dated 3.3.2017 (Annexure-4), Labour Registration Certificate is mandatory where more than 20 labourers have been engaged for execution of the work. In the present case, the petitioner had engaged 36 labourers for execution of the work in question, as would reveal from the Salary sheet of the petitioner submitted 28.4.2022. Copies of the relevant Salary Sheets submitted by the petitioner is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-A/3.

// 3 //

(ii) Escalation Bill Escalation Bill submitted by the petitioner demanding labourers engaged w.e.f. 31.7.2006 to May, 2007; whereas the work has been completed in all respect on 30.6.2007. A copy of the escalation bill and a copy of work completion certificate dated 30.6.2007 extracted from Online Management, Monitoring & Accounting System (OMMAS) are annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-B/3 Series.

(iii) Salary Sheets (Wages Register) Most Salary Sheets have been prepared without details as to when the payments were made. Copies of the relevant Salary Sheets submitted by the petitioner, which do not show date of engagement and payment are annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-C/3 Series.

(iv) Muster Roll The petitioner has not submitted Authenticated Muster Roll. The Muster Roll of the year 2006 and 2007 submitted by the petitioner appears to be manufactured and does not bear any endorsement of the then Junior Engineer and Sub Divisional Officer as is the statutory requirement. From a reading of Muster Roll, it would reveal that lobours were engaged for 13 days, whereas the petitioner has mentioned that the labourers were engaged for 15 days. As such the calculation of total days of engagement of each labourer as mentioned in the Muster Roll is not correct. Copies some pages of Muster Roll along with relevant extract of Appendix to Para-I of General Conditions of Contract is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-D/3 Series.

Accordingly, the representation of the petitioner was considered and rejected vide Order No.6041 dated 3.8.2022 (Annexure-9) on the ground of non-submission of genuine documents as per the guidelines/modality stipulated by the Government of Odisha in the Department of Rural Development vide Office Memorandum dated 3.3.2017 vide Annexure-4 for reimbursement of enhanced minimum wages consequent upon revision of minimum wages in the execution of PMGSY Works.=

// 4 //

5. Considering the reason in rejection of the representation of

the Petitioner, vide order dated 14.03.2023 this Court directed the

learned counsel for the Petitioner to obtain instruction from the

Petitioner, if he is ready and willing to pursue his further remedy in

an attempt to satisfy the doubts raised by the Authority and detailed

in paragraph-4 of the counter affidavit.

6. On further hearing of the proceeding, Mr.Rout, learned

counsel for the Petitioner, for Petitioner showing interest to further

pursue the Authority with required material in an attempt to clear the

doubts raised therein wants to withdraw the Writ Petition with

liberty to meet with asking of the contesting Opposite Parties