Orissa High Court
Kiranbala Jena vs State Of Odisha & Others .... Opposite ... on 11 December, 2023
Author: A.K. Mohapatra
Bench: A.K. Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.39259 of 2023
Kiranbala Jena .... Petitioner
Mr. S.K. Das, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha & others .... Opposite Parties
Mr. S. Das, A.G.A.
CORAM:
JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA
ORDER
Order No. 11.12.2023
01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual
/Physical Mode).
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned
Additional Government Advocate for the State-Opposite Parties.
Perused the Writ Petition as well as the documents annexed thereto.
3. The present Writ Petition has been filed by the Petitioner with the
following prayer :
"Under the above circumstances, it is therefore humbly
prayed that the Hon'ble Court be graciously pleased to direct
the Opp. Parties to sanction family pension in favour of the
petitioner w.e.f. 13.06.2019 and grant her all consequential
retiral benefits with arrears within a stipulated period as deem
fit and proper;
And/or pas any others appropriate writ/writs, order/orders
and direction/directions in the fitness of the case."
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset submitted that the
husband of the Petitioner while working as a contractual employee was
regularized in service in the year 2011. Thereafter, while the husband of
the Petitioner in service died in harness on 12.06.2019. After the death
of the husband, the present Petitioner, who is wife of death person and
legally entitled to get the family pension has approached this Court for a
direction to the Opposite Parties to grant her the family pension by
// 2 //
taking into consideration the service of husband of the Petitioner from
the date of his initial engagement w.e.f. 13.02.2004 thereby making a
service of the husband of the petitioner a pensionable one and
accordingly on such basis to grant family pension to the present
petitioner.
5. In course of his argument, learned counsel for the petitioner
further referring to the judgment of this Court in Rabindra Kumar
Jena vs. State of Odisha & ors. in W.P.(C) No.36009 of 2021
decided on 07.12.2022 submitted before this Court that in a same
situation this Court while interpreting the law and Odisha Pension
Rule, 1992 has come to a conclusion where the employee was
engaged prior to the amendment up to the year, 2005 and he was
subsequently regularized, his period of service shall be reckoned on
the date of initial engagement for the purpose of calculation of
pensionary benefit. In view of the aforesaid proposition of law laid
down by this Court learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the present Petitioner is entitled to get the family pension and
accordingly she has approached this Court for a direction to the
Opposite Parties to grant of such family pension.
6. Learned Additional Government Advocate, on the other hand
contended that the Petitioner was engaged as a contractual employees
subsequently his services were regularized, however, during his service
career the Petitioner never prayed for regularization of his service from
the date of his initial engagement. However, he does not dispute the fact
of the husband of the Petitioner died in harness on 12.06.2019. Learned
Additional Government further contended that since the service of the
Petitioner was regularized in the year 2011, in view of the amendment
in the Odisha Pension Rules in the year 2005, the husband of the
Petitioner is not entitled to any pensionary benefits. Therefore, the
Present Petitioner is also not entitled to get any family pension. In such
// 3 //
view of the matter, learned Additional Government Advocate submitted
the present writ application is devoid of merit and accordingly the same
should be dismissed.
7. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the Parties and
on a careful examination of their submissions as well as materials on
record, this Court observed that the factual background of the present
case remains undisputed i.e. the Petitioner was initially on 13.02.2004
on contractual basis as a Junior Engineer (Civil). Thereafter, the service
of the late husband of the Petitioner was regularized pursuant to a
policy decision of the Government by order dated 04.08.2011 w.e.f.
16.02.2010. However, while working as such Junior Engineer (Civil)
the husband of the Petitioner died in harness. Since the husband of the
Petitioner was working, the question of pensionary benefits need not
arise for consideration at that point of time. After the death of the
husband of the petitioner, the Petitioner is a poor widow lady has
approached this Court by filing the writ application for grant of family
pension.
8. Considering the factual background of the present case, this
Court is of the considered view the case of the Petitioner needs to be
examined by the authorities in the light of law laid down by this
Court the Rabindra Kumar Jena's case (supra) and accordingly
necessary orders be passed on the prayer of the Petitioner for grant of
family pension. In such view of the matter, this Court deems it proper to
dispose of the writ application at the stage of admission by granting
liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation taking therein all
the grounds along with a copy of the judgment in Rabindra Kumar
Jena's case before the Opposite Party No.3 within a period of three
weeks from today. If the same is filed, the same shall be considered in
accordance with law and in the light of the law laid down in the
Rabindra Kumar Jena's case (supra) within a period of six weeks from
// 4 //
the date of communication of a certified copy of this order. The final
order so passed be communicated to Petitioner within two weeks
thereafter.
9. 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
Designation: Junior Stenographer
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 13-Dec-2023 15:21:31
