Orissa High Court
State Of Odisha & Others vs Menaka Parida on 26 April, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
FAO No.250 of 2019
State of Odisha & Others .... Appellants
Mr. S.K. Samal, AGA
-versus-
Menaka Parida .... Respondent
Mr.B.B. Mohanty, Advocate
COROM:
JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
ORDER
26.04.2023
Order No
06. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode.
2. Heard Mr. S.K. Samal, learned Addl. Government
Advocate for the Appellants and Mr. B.B. Mohanty,
learned counsel appearing for the private Respondent.
3. This appeal has been filed challenging the order
dated 01.02.2019 passed by the learned State Education
Tribunal, Odisha, Bhubaneswar in Execution Case No.25
of 2015.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants contended that
seeking execution of the judgment so passed by the
Tribunal on 24.12.2013 in GIA Case No.321 of 2011, the
present respondent filed Execution Case No.25 of 2015. In
the said execution case, when the Tribunal passed an
order directing for stoppage of the salary of the present
Appellant Nos.1 and 2 from the month of March, 2019, the
present appeal was filed challenging such order of the
Tribunal.
4.1. Learned counsel for the Appellants contended that the
Tribunal while executing the order in question, has no
// 2 //
authority to direct for stoppage of the salary of appellants
Nos.1 and 2 and accordingly the said order is not
sustainable. It is contended that considering the plea
raised by the appellants, this Court vide order dated
02.08.2019 stayed the operation of the said order.
5. Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel for the Respondent
contended that against an order passed in execution case,
no appeal is maintainable and because of the pendency of
this appeal, the Tribunal is also not proceeding with the
matter in Execution Case No.25/2015.
5.1. Mr. Mohanty learned counsel for the Respondent
contended that challenging the judgment passed by the
Tribunal on 24.12.2013, the present appellants
approached this Court in FAO No.587 of 2015. This Court
vide order dated 14.12.2017 was not inclined to entertain
the said appeal on the ground of limitation and accordingly
dismissed the appeal. It is further contented by Mr.
Mohanty that no further challenge was made to the order
dated 14.12.2017 by the appellants and accordingly the
order passed by the Tribunal on 24.12.2013 has attained
the finality in the eye of law.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the Parties and
taking into account the stand taken in the appeal, this
Court is of the view that the Tribunal committed an error
in directing for stoppage of the salary of the appellant
Nos.1 and 2 from the month of March, 2019 vide order
dated 01.02.2019. Accordingly, this Court is inclined to
quash the said order. While quashing the same, this Court
when was inclined to permit the Tribunal to proceed with
the execution case and dispose of the same in accordance
with law. Mr. Samal, learned Addl. Government Advocate
// 3 //
contended that if this Court will allow three months time to
the appellants, the order in question will be complied with.
6.1. Considering such submission made by the learned
Addl. Government Advocate, this Court directs the
appellants to comply with the order passed by the Tribunal
on 24.12.2013 in GIA Case No.321 of 2011 within a period
of three months from today.
7. Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel for the Respondent is
directed to file an application to withdraw of the execution
case within a period of seven days from the date of receipt
of this order. On production of the certified copy of this
order before the Tribunal, the execution case shall be
treated as dropped.
8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the
FAO stands disposed of.
(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy)
Judge
Subrat
