Orissa High Court
Sri Pratap Kumar Mishra vs State Of Odisha And Others on 19 April, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No. 12089 of 2023
Sri Pratap Kumar Mishra .... Petitioner
Mr. S.K. Ojha, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opposite Parties
Mr. Tarun Pattnaik, ASC
CORAM:
JUSTICE A.K.MOHAPATRA
ORDER
Order No. 19.04.2023
01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement
(Virtual/Physical Mode).
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned
Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Opposite
Parties. Perused the writ petition as well as the documents
annexed thereto.
3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ petition with the
following prayer:-
"Under the facts and circumstances stated above, it
is therefore prayed that the Hon'ble Court may graciously
be pleased to issue rule NISI calling upon the Opp.
Parties to show cause as to why the writ in the nature of
certiorari shall not be issued quashing paragraph-3 of the
order dtd. 11.03.2020 (Annex.2) & issue writ in the nature
of mandamus directing the opposite parties particularly
Opp. Party No.1 to extend the Grade Pay of Rs.6600/-
towards 3rd Financial Up-Gradation under RACP Scheme
with effect from 01.01.2013 with all consequential service
benefits within a stipulated time.
// 2 //
And further be pleased to pass any other order(s)
as deemed fit and proper for the ends of justice."
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner
that pursuant to the order passed by the Odisha Administrative
Tribunal in O.A. No.133 of 2019 dated 15.1.2019, the Petitioner
was allowed Grade Pay of Rs.6600/-. However, vide order
dated 11.3.2020 under Annexure-2 enhanced Grade Pay of
Rs.6600/- granted pursuant to the Tribunal's order was confined
upto 3.1.2013. Thereafter, the Petitioner was allowed to revised
Grade Pay of Rs.5400/- in Pay Band-2, Scale of Pay of
Rs.9,300-34,800/- with protection of differential pay in the
shape of RPP to be merged in subsequent increment consequent
upon restructuring of OES cadre bringing the post of Deputy
Executive Engineer in the Grade Pay of Rs.5400/- as the 3rd
promotional post of Junior Engineer.
5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at this juncture
submitted that the para-3 of order dated 11.03.2020 under
Annexure-2 was challenged by another person, namely, Sunil
Kumar Mohapatra in respect of the Works Department having a
very same para-3 in the impugned order in his case dated
28.02.2020. This Court in W.P.(C) No.16290 of 2020 while
adjudicating the issue vide judgment dated 01.03.2023 has
come to a conclusion that the 3rd paragraph of order dated
28.02.2020 in the case of above named Sunil Kumar
Mohapatra, which is identical to the 3rd paragraph of the case of
the Petitioner in order dated 11.03.2020 under Annexure-2 has
// 3 //
been held to be illegal and arbitrary and, accordingly, the said
paragraph was quashed and the Petitioner in that case was
granted Grade Pay of Rs.6,600/-.
6. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that
under Annexure-4 to the writ petition vide order dated 27th
January, 2023 similar benefit of Grade Pay of Rs.6600/- has
also been allowed in respect of 33 numbers of Civil Engineers
who have completed 20 and 30 years of service respectively in a
single cadre as on 1.1.2013. In the light of the aforesaid factual
background, the Petitioner approached the Opposite Party No.1-
Additioannl Chief Secretary, Department of Water Resources
by filing a representation dated 13.3.2023 under Annexure-6 to
the writ petition. It is stated by the learned counsel for the
Petitioner that the same is pending for consideration by the
Opposite Party No.1.
7. Learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the
State-Opposite Parties, on the other hand, submitted that since
the Petitioner has approached the Opposite Party No.1 by filing
a detailed representation, the Opposite Party No.1 be directed to
consider such representation in accordance with law within a
stipulated period of time, to which, he has no objection.
8. Considering the submission made by the learned counsel
for the respective parties and upon a careful consideration of the
background facts as well as the judgment by a coordinate Bench
of this Court in Sunil Kumar Mohanty v. State of Odisha &
// 4 //
Others (W.P.(C) No.16209 of 2020 decided on 01.03.2023),
this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ petition by
directing the Opposite Party No.1 to consider the representation
of the Petitioner dated 13.3.2023 under Annexure-6 to the writ
petition keeping in view the decision dated 27th January, 2023
under Annexure-4 as well as the judgment by a coordinate
Bench of this Court in Sunil Kumar Mohapatra's case (supra)
and take a decision on the same within a period of two months
from the date of communication of a certified copy of this order
by the Petitioner. Further, it is directed that in the event the
Opposite Party No.1 comes to conclusion that the Petitioner
stand on similar footing with the above named Sunil Kumar
Mohapatra and persons who have been given such benefits
under Annexure-4 vide order dated 27th January, 2023, then the
similar benefits be extended to the Petitioner within a period of
six weeks from the date taking decision on such representation.
Any decision taken on such representation shall be
communicated to the Petitioner within two weeks thereafter.
9. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ
petition stands disposed of.
(A.K. Mohapatra)
Judge
Debasis
