Orissa High Court
Kasturi Naik vs State Of Odisha & Others on 1 May, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WPC (OAC) No.3919 of 2014
Kasturi Naik .... Petitioner
Mr. R.K. Bose, Adv.
-versus-
State of Odisha & Others .... Opp. Parties
Mr. S.K. Samal, A.G.A
CORAM:
JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
ORDER
01.05.2023
Order No
2. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid
Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode.
2. Heard Mr. R.K. Bose, learned counsel appearing
for the Petitioner and Mr. S.K. Samal, learned A.G.A
3. The Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition
inter alia with the following prayer.
(i) direct the Respondents to regularize the
service of her husband in the post of Chowkidar
under its administrative control with effect from the
date on which his juniors have been regularized or
in the alternative be brought to the regular
establishment at least for pensionary purpose
within a stipulated period and grant family pension
to the applicant.
4. It is contended that the Petitioner's husband was
engaged as a Chowkidar in the work charge
establishment where he joined on 10.03.1975 and the
said fact is also reflected in the office order issued
under Annexure-1.
// 2 //
4.1. Mr. R.K. Bose, learned counsel for the Petitioner
contended that even though the deceased employee
was allowed to continue in the work charged
establishment w.e.f 10.03.1975 till he attains the age of
superannuation on 31.08.2013, but no step was taken
to absorb the deceased employee in the regular
establishment and thereby denying him the benefit of
pension and other pensionary benefits.
4.2. It is also contended that since the deceased
employee after his retirement on 31.08.2013, as
reflected in Annexure-4 died on 13.11.2013, he could
not make any application before the competent
authority seeking sanction of pension and other
pensionary benefits in his favour. Accordingly, the
Petitioner has filed this Writ Petition with a prayer to
direct the Opp. Parties to sanction family pension in
her favour.
4.3. Mr. Bose, learned counsel appearing for the
Petitioner contended that similar issue has been
decided by this Court in a number of cases, more
particularly, by this Court in its judgment
dt.26.09.2022 in W.P.C(OAC) No.4660 of 2016 and
order dt.17.5.2022 in W.P.(C ) No.11686 of 2022. It is
contended that the claim of the Petitioner is squarely
covered by the aforesaid decisions of this Court.
5. Mr. S.K. Samal, learned Additional Government
Advocate on the other hand contended that since the
Petitioner has not approached the authority seeking
grant of benefit prior to approaching this Court, the
// 3 //
Petitioner be permitted to move the competent
authority for redressal of her grievance.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
taking into account the claim made by the Petitioner,
this Court while disposing the Writ Petition, directs
Opp. Party No.1 to take a lawful decision on the
petitioner's claim for sanction of family pension in the
light of the order passed by this Court in its judgment
dt.26.09.2022 in W.P.C(OAC) No.4660 of 2016 and
order dt.17.5.2022 passed in W.P.(C ) No.11686 of
2022. Such a decision shall be taken within a period of
three months from the date of receipt of this order.
The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of.
(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy)
Judge
Sangita
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SANGITA PATRA
Designation: Personal Assistant
Reason: Authentication of the order
Location: High Court of Orissa,Cuttack
Date: 06-May-2023 15:55:58
