Orissa High Court
Suresh Chandra Dash vs State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite ... on 5 April, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.8470 of 2025
Suresh Chandra Dash ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
Amit Prasad Bose
-versus-
State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties
Represented By Adv. -
M.R. Mohanty, A.G.A.
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
MOHAPATRA
ORDER
05.04.2025
Order No.
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 application as well as the documents annexed
thereto.
3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the
following prayer:
"The petitioner therefore prays that your Lordship's
may graciously be pleased to admit this writ application,
issue show cause to the opp.parties as to why the leave
salary for 300 days of unutilised earned leave of the
petitioner is released without further delay, if they fails to
show cause or give insufficient show cause, this Hon'ble
Court may direct the opp party no.3 to release leave salary
of the petitioner at the earliest in the interest of justice,
And pass any other order(s) direction(s) as this
Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper"
4. It is stated by learned counsel for the Petitioner that the
Petitioner initially joined as a Constable in Odisha Police on
01.12.1989. Thereafter, the Petitioner retired from service as
Constable UP & TTI under the Commissionerate of Police,
Bhubaneswar-Cuttack on 31.07.2023 on attaining the age of
superannuation. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended
while the Petitioner was working as Constable, he was entangled in a
Vigilance P.S. Case No.18 dated 15.07.2020. While he was involved
in the vigilance case, a Disciplinary Proceeding was also initiated
against the present Petitioner which is stated to be pending before the
authorities for final adjudication. The grievance of the Petitioner in
the present writ application is that although the Petitioner is entitled
to the unutilized leave salary of 300 days, however, the authorities
have not paid the same to the Petitioner. Being aggrieved by such
conduct, the Petitioner had earlier approached this Court by filing
W.P.(C) No.6353 of 2024. This Court, vide order dated 20.03.2024,
disposed of the aforesaid writ application by granting liberty to the
petitioner to approach the Opposite Party No.3 by filing a detailed
representation with a corresponding direction to the Opposite Party
No.3 to consider the same in accordance with law.
5. After disposal of the previous writ application, the Petitioner
approached the Opposite Parties. However, the Opposite Party No.3,
vide order dated 24.04.2024, rejected the claim of the Petitioner with
regard to grant of unutilized leave salary by referring to the Finance
Dept. notification dated 26.03.2015. He further contended that the
same notification provides that in the event any departmental or
judicial proceeding is pending against the govt. servant on the date of
retirement, such govt. servant is not entitled to the unutilized leave
salary and the same shall be withheld by the authorities till
conclusion of the pending proceedings. In course of his argument,
learned counsel for the Petitioner further submitted that there is no
bar in law for withholding the unutilized leave salary of the govt.
servant even if a departmental or judicial proceeding is pending
against the present Petitioner.
6. Learned Additional Government Advocate on the other hand
contended that after disposal of the earlier writ application, the
representation of the Petitioner has been considered and the same has
been rejected by referring to the Finance Dept. notification as has
been referred to hereinabove. In such view of the matter, learned
counsel for the State contended that the Opposite Parties have not
committed any illegality which would call for any interference by
this Court.
7. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective
parties, on a careful examination of the background facts as well as
materials on record, further taking note of the fact that the Petitioner
has approached this Court by filing the present writ application with
a prayer for a direction to the Opposite Parties to extend the benefit
of unutilized leave salary for a period of 300 days, as is due and
admissible to the Petitioner and on perusal of the record, it appears
that since a Departmental Proceeding and a Judicial Proceeding are
pending against the Petitioner, the unutilized leave salary as is due
and admissible to the Petitioner has been withheld by the authorities.
The aforesaid issue is no more res-integra since this Court had an
occasion to discuss the issue in detail in the case of Chiitaranjan
Senapati v. State of Odisha and another in W.P.(C) No.20808 of
2024 vide judgment dated 06.03.2025.
8. In view of the aforesaid analysis of the factual position as well
as the law applicable to the case of the Petitioner, this Court is of the
observation that the matter requires re-consideration by the
authorities in terms of the law laid down by this Court in
Chiitaranjan Senapati's case (supra). Accordingly, the impugned
order dated 24.04.2024 under Annexure-6 is hereby set aside.
Further, the matter is remanded back to the Opposite Party No.3 with
a direction to reconsider the entire issue by taking into consideration
the law laid down by this Court in Chiitaranjan Senapati's case
(supra) within a period of eight weeks from the date of
communication of a certified copy of this order by the Petitioner. The
grievance of the Petitioner shall be disposed of by passing a speaking
and reasoned order by referring to the above noted judgment. The
final decision so taken by the Opposite Party No.3 be also
communicated to the Petitioner within ten days from the date of
taking such a decision.
9. With the aforesaid observation, the writ application stands
disposed of.
10. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.
( A.K. Mohapatra )
Judge
Anil
Digitally Signed Page 4 of 4.
Designation: Junior Stenographer
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 05-Apr-2025 16:03:50
