Orissa High Court
Pramod Kumar Khamari vs State Of Odisha & Others on 4 October, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.31599 of 2023
Pramod Kumar Khamari .... Petitioner
Mr. A.J. Rout, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha & others .... Opposite Parties
Mr. T. Patnaik, A.S.C.
CORAM:
JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA
ORDER
Order No. 04.10.2023
01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual
/Physical Mode).
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned
counsel for the State. Perused the writ petition as well as documents
annexed thereto.
3. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the
following prayers:
"Under the above circumstances, it is humbly prayed that the
writ petition may be allowed; and
(A) a writ of mandamus or an appropriate writ may be
issued commanding the opposite parties to bring the
petitioner under regular establishment as he had put in
more than 34 years of service both in the capacity of NMR
and work charge employee till his retirement from service
i.e. 31.07.2021 as similarly situated Work Charged
Employees have been brought over to regular
establishment and he may also be provided with the
benefits of O.C.S. (Pension) Rules, 1992 prior to its
amendment in terms of the Office Memorandum dated
01.05.2010 issued by the Government of Odisha in the
Department of Finance as the petitioner was appointed
prior to the cutoff date i.e. 01.01.2005 keeping in view the
judgment rendered by this Hon'ble Court in the case of
// 2 //
State of Odisha vrs. Pitambar Sahoo, W.P.(C)
No.24041 of 2017 (decided on 20.12.2017), which has
been affirmed in SLP(C) Diary No.30806 of 2018 and
Basanti Behera vrs. State of Odisha and others (W.P.(C)
No.13314 of 2020 disposed of on 06.07.2021), in the case
of Chandra Nandi vrs. State of Odisha and others:
reported in 2014 (I) OLR 73, in the case of Premananda
Tripathy Vrs. State of Odisha and others (W.P.(C)
No.27950 of 2019 disposed on 03.02.2021). in the case of
State of Odisha and other Vrs. Jyostna Rani Patnaik and
others (W.P.(C) No.1534 of 2008 disposed of on
19.12.2016) as well as in the case of Harbanslal vrs. The
State of Punjab and others (CWP No.2371 of 2020,
decided on 31.08.2010) by the High Court of Punjab and
Haryana, which has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in SLP(C) No.23578 of 2012 (SLP(C) No.19901 of
2011, disposed of on 30.07.2012 (State of Punjab and
others vrs. Harbanslal) and also in the case of Jeewanlata
vrs. State of Punjab and others (CWP No.10238 of 2017
(O&M), decided on 10.05.2019, with all consequential
benefits within a time to be stipulated by this Hon'ble
Court;
(B) And any other order/orders or direction/directions may
be issued so as to give complete relief to the petitioner;"
4. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that
pension and pensionary benefits be granted under the old rule in the
light of decision in the case of State of Odisha vrs. Pitambar Sahoo,
W.P.(C) No.24041 of 2017 (decided on 20.12.2017), which has been
affirmed in SLP(C) Diary No.30806 of 2018 and Chandra Nandi vrs.
State of Odisha and others, W.P.(C) No.19950 of 2011(decided on
03.02.2021) and Premananda Tripathy vrs. State of Odisha, W.P.(C)
No.27950 of 2019 (decided on 03.02.2021) and Narusu Pradhan, SLP
No.22498 of 2012, State of Orissa and others vrs. Jyostna Rani
Pattanaik and others, W.P.(C) No.1534 of 2008, State of Orissa vrs.
Pitambar Mohapatra, W.P.(C) No.13483 of 2012 and State of Orissa
vrs. Radheshyam Mohanta, W.P.(C) No.12377 of 2009, which has
// 3 //
been affirmed in SLP(C) No.36038 of 2020 as well as the benefits given
to similar persons.
5. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the
petitioner-Pratap Kishore Mohanty was initially engaged as N.M.R in
the office of the Executive Engineer, Mahanadi Stores & Mechanical
Division on 01.06.1987 and was subsequently brought over to work
charged establishment w.e.f 1.3.2009 by virtue of the order of the
Executive Engineer, Kanpur Head Works Division, Keonjhar and
continued to work under the work charged establishment. The petitioner
had already worked for more than 13 years in Work Charged
Establishment prior to its superannuation.
6. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this Court
in WPC(OAC) No.3494 of 2013 by order dated 14.07.2021 analyzing
various points of law directed the State Government to regularize in
establishment post from the time, the petitioners completed five years of
continuous service in work charged establishment and the period from
that time till the date of retirement be counted towards the pension and
direction was issued to grant pensionary benefits to the employees. He
further submits that in similar matter, Government had challenged the
order of the learned tribunal approached this Court in filing a writ
petition bearing W.P.(C) No.5377 of 2010 and this Court by order dated
19.12.2011 referring the judgment rendered in O.J.C. No.1162 of 1999
(State of Orissa vrs. Jhuma Parida and others) and O.J.C. No.11028
of 1999 (State of Orissa vrs. Sudarsan Sahoo and others) confirmed
the order passed by the learned tribunal and dismissed the writ
application.
7. In course of hearing, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the
Petitioner that the Petitioner wants to make a fresh representation before
the authority concerned with a direction from this Court to the authority
to consider the case of the Petitioner within a stipulated period of time.
8. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, submits that he
// 4 //
has no objection if the Petitioner is permitted to file a fresh
representation before the authority concerned with a direction to the
authority concerned to consider the representation of the Petitioner in
accordance with law within the stipulated period of time.
9. Considering the submissions made by learned counsels for the
respective parties, on careful consideration the background of the fact of
the petitioner, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ petition
by directing the petitioner to file a fresh representation ventilating his
grievances along with certified copy of this order before the Engineer-
in-Chief, Water Resources, Bhubaneswar, Opposite Party No.3 within
three weeks from today. In the event such a representation is filed
within the aforesaid period, the Opposite Party No.3 shall do well to
consider and dispose of the same in accordance with law within a
period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the representation and
the same shall be considered and disposed of by passing a speaking and
reasoned order within the aforesaid time stipulated. Decision so taken
on the same shall be communicated to the Petitioner within a period of
one week thereafter.
10. 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: 09-Oct-2023 10:09:34
