Chita Ranjan Pradhan vs Heard Learned Counsel For The ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 2934 Ori

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                                WP(C) NO.8566 OF 2023

            Chita Ranjan Pradhan                        ....                Petitioner

                                                              Mr.A.Pattanaik,Adv.

                                           -versus-


            State of Odisha and Others                  ....           Opp.Parties
                                                               Mr.U.K.Sahoo,ASC


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

06.04.2023 Order No.

01. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Parties.

2. This Writ Petition involves the following prayer:-

<In the above facts and circumstances, it is most humbly and respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus directing Opp. Party No-3 to reimburse the enhanced differential amount of minimum wages, as enhanced from Annexure-2 on the basis of the formula given under Annexure-3 (Series) and in view of the judgment of this Hon'ble Court passed in Mahesh Mishra's case (supra) under Annexure-4 in respect of the Tender Work for <Improvement to Road and CD works (including Maintenance) under Pradhan Mantri Gram Sadak Yojana (P.M.G.S.Y.) Batch-II, in the district of Gajapati for the Package Numbers-OR-10-313/Batch-II(2017-18), (Name of the work- Souri to Baroi vides Agreement No-OR-10- EEM-10/2018-19 PMGSY=.

Issue Rule Nisi;

Or in alternate, may direct the Opp. Party No.3, to dispose the representation dated 24.01.2023 (vide Annexure-5) within a stipulated period.

And, may pass any other order/orders as may deem fit and proper;

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

// 2 //

3. On the selfsame issue, it appears, Petitioner has already made a representation to the Competent Authority vide Annexure-5 which is pending consideration of the Competent Authority.

4. Considering the Writ Petition becomes premature at this stage, in disposal of the Writ Petition this Court directs the Executive Engineer, Rural Works Division, Mohana-O.P.3 to look into the grievance of the Petitioner, keeping in view the applicability of the judgment referred therein by the Petitioner at Annexure-5 and pass a lawful order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merit involved in the case at the instance of the Petitioner and the Authority is to take independent decision on the issue involved. It is open to the Petitioner to serve copy of the Writ Petition along with copy of the judgment referred to and relied on by the Petitioner through its representation on O.P.3 at least within a period of seven working days.

5. With this observation, this Writ Petition thus stands disposed of.

(Biswanath Rath) Judge

(M.S.Sahoo) Judge U.Nayak