Umakanta Behera & Others vs State Of Odisha & Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 10437 Ori

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                W.P.(C) No.27366 of 2023

                 Umakanta Behera & others              ....            Petitioners
                                                        Mr. J.K. Khuntia, Advocate
                                            -versus-
                 State of Odisha & others              ....      Opposite Parties
                                                                Mr. S. Das, A.G.A.

                                          CORAM:

                            JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA

                                           ORDER

Order No.                                 30.08.2023
    01.     1.      This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual
            /Physical Mode).

2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ petition as well as the documents annexed thereto.

3. The present writ application has been filed by the Petitioners with the following prayer:-

"That Petitioners therefore, pray that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to admit the writ petition, call for the records and issue a rule NISI calling upon the Opp. Parties to show cause as to why the petitioners differential arrear salary in temporary status with regard to equal pay for equal work from the date of appointment to onwards shall not be released; or if the Opp. Parties fail to show cause or show insufficient cause, the Hon'ble court may issue a writ of mandamus directing the Opp. Parties to release differential arrear salary from the date of appointment to onwards to the petitioner in the light of judgment State of Punjab & Ors. Versus Jagjit Singh & Ors 2016 (II) ILR-CUT- 1127 (S.C.) within a time fixed by the Hon'ble Court. And direction may be issued to opp.party No.4 to dispose of the representation.

And pass such other order/orders as this High Court // 2 //

may deem fit and proper in this case."

4. Being aggrieved by the inaction of the Opposite Parties in considering the representation of the Petitioners under Annexure-4, the Petitioners have approached this Court by filing the present writ application. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the Petitioners have already approached the Opposite Party No.4 by filing a representation on 11.09.2022, however, the same has not been considered and no final order has been passed. In course of his argument, learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that the Supreme Court has disposed of the S.L.P.(C) No.15526-27 of 1995 with an observation that prior to the regularization of service of the Petitioners for the period for which they worked as NMR employees, they shall be paid a minimum pay scale as is applicable to the regular employees doing such type of work. He further submitted that in W.P.(C) No.14008 of 2003 in Kanhu Charan Nanda vs. State of Orissa & Ors. a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 21.02.2007 has also taken a similar view and directed to grant minimum of pay scale as is available to the counter part of the Petitioners in those cases further period prior to the regularization. The order passed by the Division Bench in W.P.(C) No.14008 of 2003 has been affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Odisha & Others vs. Kanhu Charan Nanda bearing SLP (C) No.13173 of 2007 disposed of on 07.08.2009. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further referred to a latest judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIVIL APPEAL No.213 of 2013 State of Punjab & Ors. vs. Jagjit Singh & Ors. reported in 2016(II) ILR-CUT-1127(SC) and submitted before this Court the Hon'ble Supreme Court had directed for grant of minimum scale to the persons who are working as NMR/ DLR basis as they were performing a similar nature of work who have been performed by their counterpart in the regular establishment.

5. Learned Additional Government Advocate on the other hand // 3 //

contended that since the Petitioners have approached the Opposite Party No.4 by filing a representation under Annexure-4 to the writ application, he will have no objection in the event this Court directs the Opposite Party No.4 to consider the representation of the Petitioners under Annexure-4 in accordance with law and dispose of the same within a stipulated period of time.

6. Considering the submission made by the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties and on a careful examination of the background facts of the present case and keeping in view the limited nature of the grievance involved in the present writ application, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ application at the stage of admission by directing the Chief Construction Enginneer, Eastern Circle (R&B), Balasore- Opposite Party No.4 to consider the representation of the Petitioners under Annexure-4, in the event the same is still pending, strictly in accordance with law keeping in view the judgment referred hereinabove and dispose of the same by passing a speaking and reasoned order within a period of two months from the date of communication of the certified copy of this order by the Petitioner. The decision so taken by the Opposite Party No.1 be also communicated to the Petitioner within two weeks from the date of taking such a decision.

7. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the writ application stands disposed of.

Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.

( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Anil

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: ANIL KUMAR SAHOO Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 31-Aug-2023 18:55:56