Orissa High Court
Gopabandhu Pattnaik vs State Of Odisha And Others on 13 July, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P (C) No. 12045 of 2016
Gopabandhu Pattnaik ..... Petitioner
Mr. T.K. Satapathy, Adv.
Vs.
State of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties
Mr. A.K. Mishra, AGA
CORAM:
DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI
MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN
ORDER
13.07.2023
Order No. This matter is taken up by hybrid mode.
14.
2. This Court, vide order dated 08.05.2023, called upon
learned State Counsel to file a detailed calculation showing the
entitlement of the petitioner by way of an affidavit. In response to
the same, the opposite party-authority filed an affidavit on
16.05.2023, paragraphs-3 to 7 whereof are extracted hereunder:-
"3. That, it is humbly submitted that the House Rent
Allowance as claimed by the petitioner for the month of
February 2011, November 2011, February 2012, April
2012 to March 2013 @ Rs.10,544/- per month for 15
months, amounting to Rs.1,58,160/- (Rupees one lakh
fifty eight thousand one hundred sixty only) have not
been paid till date to the petitioner.
4. That, it is humbly submitted that the fixed Medical
Allowance for the month of March 2011 and February
2012 @ Rs.1,000/- per month for 2 months, amounting
to Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) have not been
paid till date to the petitioner.
5. That, it is humbly submitted that the Sumptuary
Allowance for the month of March 2011 amounting to
Rs.3.100/- (Rupees three thousand one hundred only)
has not been paid till date to the petitioner.
6. That, it is humbly submitted that the Conveyance
Allowance for the month of May 2012- Rs.3300/-, June
2012- Rs.3300/-, July 2012- Rs.3400/-, August 2012-
Rs.3400/-, September 2012- Rs.3400/-, October 2012-
Rs.3400/-, November 2012- Rs.3300/-, December 2012-
Rs.3300/-, January 2012- Rs.3300/-, February 2013-
Rs.3300/- and March 2013- Rs.3350/-, total amounting
to Rs.36,750/- (Rupees thirty six thousand seven
hundred fifty only) have not been paid till date to the
petitioner.
7. That, it is humbly submitted that the above said
allowances as mentioned in paragraph no.3,4, 5 and 6
in total amounting to Rs.2,00,010/- (Rupees two lakh ten
only) have not been paid to the petitioner due to non-
availability of funds."
3. In view of the aforementioned submission, it is admitted
that the petitioner is entitled to get Rs.2,00,010/-. But reasons have
been assigned that due to non-availability of funds, the benefit has
not been extended to the petitioner. Non-availability of funds or
paucity of funds is not a reason not to extend the benefits as due
and admissible to the petitioner, in view of the judgment of the
apex Court in the case of State of Maharashtra v. Manubhai
Pragaji Vashi, AIR 1996 SC 1, wherein the apex Court held that
the plea of paucity of funds taken by the State would not be
tenable as the paucity of funds can be no reason for
discrimination.
4. In view of the law laid down by the apex Court in
Manubhai Pragaji Vashi (supra), this Court is of the considered
view that if the entitlement of the petitioner is due, the same
should have been paid by the opposite party-authority. Therefore,
the writ petition stands disposed of directing the opposite party-
authority to pay the amount due to the petitioner as expeditiously
as possible, preferably within a period of two months from the
date of production of the certified copy of this order.
Ashok (DR. B.R. SARANGI)
JUDGE
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: ASHOK KUMAR JAGADEB MOHAPATRA (M.S. RAMAN)
Designation: Personal Assistant
Reason: Authentication JUDGE
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
Date: 14-Jul-2023 11:22:27
