Narayan Chandra Samal vs State Of Odisha And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 4895 Ori

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                                W.P.(C) No.12600 of 2023

                 Narayan Chandra Samal                  ....           Petitioner
                                                   Mr. P.K.Mohapatra, Advocate

                                              -versus-

                 State of Odisha and others               ....      Opposite Parties
                                                         Mr. Iswar Mohanty, A.S.C.

                             CORAM:
                            JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA


Order No.                                   ORDER
                                           02.05.2023
    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 Standing Counsel.

            3.      The Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking direction to
            Opposite Parties to give all benefit to him against the post of I.B.
            Caretaker as per Orissa Government Service Rules and regularize his
            service by calculating five years of continuous service as work
            charged employee and give him all service benefits on that basis
            including pensionary benefit immediately within a stipulated period.

            4.      Mr.Mohapatra, learned counsel for the Petitioner contended
            that similar benefit has been extended to one Narusu Pradhan. As
            such the Petitioner having stood in similar footing, he is entitled to
                            // 2 //




grant all the benefits.

5.     Learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State contended
that the Petitioner has already retired from service and he was
working as I.B. Caretaker. He further contended that the claim of the
Petitioner cannot sustain in the eye of law.

6.     It is contended that one Narusu Pradhan, a similar
circumstanced person like the Petitioner had filed O.A.No.1189(C)
of 2006 praying for retiral benefits. The Tribunal allowed the retiral
pensionary benefits in his favour vide order dated 11.06.2009, which
was challenged by the State before this Court in W.P.(C) No.5377 of
2010. This Court dismissed the writ petition on 19.12.2011 and
confirmed the order passed by the Tribunal. Thereafter against the
order passed by this Court, the State has preferred SLP in Civil
Appeal No.22498 of 2012, the same was also dismissed on
07.01.2013

.

7. In that view of the matter, the relief claimed by the Petitioner is fully covered by the judgment of the Tribunal passed in the case of Narusu Pradhan, which has been confirmed by this Court as well as the apex Court. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the Petitioner is directed to approach the Opposite Party No.1 by filing a fresh representation within two weeks. In the event such a representation is filed, the same shall be considered in accordance with law. Further, the Opposite Party No.1 shall do well to examine whether the Petitioner's case is covered by the decision of this Court rendered in the case of Narusu Pradhan, which has been affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In the event, the authority comes to the conclusion that the Petitioner is entitled to the relief as has been // 3 //

claimed by him then the benefit extended in favour of Narusu Pradhan be also extended in favour of the Petitioner within a period of six weeks from the date of taking such a decision.

8. Let the entire exercise be carried out within a period of three months.

9. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.

( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge

DEBASIS AECH Digitally signed by DEBASIS AECH Date: 2023.05.04 14:21:06 +05'30'