Bichitrananda Kar vs State Of Odisha And
2023 Latest Caselaw 4312 Ori

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                        W.P.(C) No.11667 of 2023

        Bichitrananda Kar                    ....                    Petitioner
                                                     Mr. B.C. Panda, Advocate
                                          -versus-
        State of Odisha and
        Others                               ....               Opposite Parties
                                                          Mr. R.N. Mishra, AGA

                           CORAM:
               JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

                                            ORDER

25.04.2023 Order No.

01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. The Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition with the following prayer: -

<Therefore, it is respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to Admit this Writ Petition. Issue rule Nisi for calling upon opp. Parties, particularly opp. Party No.3 for show cause as to why the direction will not be issued for providing TGT Scale of Pay to the petitioner as he possesses the B.A. Shastri and attended the age of 48 years. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to make its Rule absolute if the said opp. Party fails to submit sufficient cause or show insufficient cause and after hearing from the parties, this Hon'ble Court may direct the opp. Parties in writ of mandamus for proving TGT Scale of Pay to the petitioner from the date of attending the age of 48 years and disburse the differential arrear salary with monthly revised salary as per the Judgment passed by this Hon'ble court in Case of Radharani Samal -versus- State of Orissa for the interest of justice and equity.= // 2 //

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that through highlighting his grievance, the petitioner has filed a representation vide Annexure-4 to the Writ Petition, but till date nothing has been done in the matter. In such background, he prays that a direction be issued to opposite party No.3 to take a decision on the above noted petition within a specific time period.

5. Considering the submissions made and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court directs opposite party No.3 to take a decision on the above noted petition in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order and communicate the result of such exercise to the petitioner.

6. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge

Basudev