Orissa High Court
Ranjan Kumar Nayak vs ) State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Parties on 5 February, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.30843 of 2024
Ranjan Kumar Nayak ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
Prafulla Kumar
Mohapatra
-versus-
1) State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Parties
2) Collector-cum-ceo, Drda, Bargarh Represented By Adv. -
3) Principal Secretary To Govt. Of Ms. B.Sahu, A.G.A.
Orissa, Finance Department
4) Block Development Officer, Bhatli
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
MOHAPATRA
ORDER
Order No. 05.02.2025
02. 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 appearing for the State-Opposite
Parties. Perused the writ petition as well as the documents annexed
thereto.
3. The present writ application has been filed by the petitioner with
the following prayer:-
"It is therefore, humbly prayed that this Hon'ble
Court be pleased to:-
i) direct the opp. parties to modify the Grade
Pay to Rs.5400/- towards 2nd financial
upgradation under MACP instead of
Rs.4800/- as has been given to other similarly
situated persons vide order under Annexure-4
and Annexure-6 in terms of the principles
decided in O.A. No.2237/2014 and 13 batch,
disposed of on 03.04.2017 relying the
judgment of this Hon'ble Court in W.P.(C)
No.2831/2016; State of Odisha vrs. Biharilal
Barik, which has been affirmed by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP Diary
No.20358/2017 and also make pay fixation as
per rules and the accrued arrear be released
in favour of the petitioner and thereby
quashing the order dated 22.07.2024 under
Annexure-8;
ii) Pass such other order(s)/direction(s) as would
be deem fit and proper in the bonafide interest
of justice;"
4. It is submitted by Mr. P.K. Mohapatra, learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit
of 2nd RACP financial upgradation as per the resolution of the Finance
Department dated 07.09.2017 read with 06.02.2013. He further
contended that similarly placed employees have also been extended
such benefits pursuant to order passed by this Court earlier. Learned
counsel for the petitioner also referred to the order passed in one such
case i.e. W.P.(C) No.5455 of 2023 disposed of on 27.02.2023 (in the
matter of Benudhar Naik vs. State of Odisha others). Learned counsel
for the petitioner further drawing the attention of this Court to
Annexure-4 and 6, i.e. order dated 16.01.2023 and 13.08.2018
submitted that the benefit of 2nd & 3rd financial upgradation has already
been extended in favour of 16 nos. of Civil Engineers, pursuant to order
passed by either the Odisha Administrative Tribunal or this Court. A
list of such engineers has been enclosed to Annexure-4 and 6. It is
further contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that although the
petitioner is entitled as per Annexure-3, the order dated 3.4.2017 in
O.A. No.2237/2014 & batch, and approached the Office of Opposite
Party No.1, however, the same was rejected vide Anenxure-8 without
following the principles decided in O.A. No.2237 of 2014 and batch as
well as the benefits given to others. Considering the submissions made,
this Court observed that the order dated 22.07.2024 under Annexure-8
is not sustainable in law and the same is hereby quashed and the matter
is remanded back to the Opposite party No.1 to reconsider the case of
the petitioner facing into account the decision in O.A. No.2237 of 2014
batch and Annexures-4 and 6. Further, it is made clear that in the event
the petitioner is legally entitled to claim such benefits he is to be
extended with such benefits along with similarly situated persons, no
order from this Court is required in this regard in view of the order vide
Annexure-3 & 4. Such conduct on the part of the Offices of Opposite
Party in this regard keep the law as well as the Magistry of this Court.
5. Learned Additional Government Advocate, on the other hand,
submits that let the petitioner approach the Opposite Party No.1 by
filing a fresh representation stating therein all the aforesaid facts and in
the event, such a representation is filed the Opposite party No.1 shall
do well to consider the same in accordance with law and dispose of the
same within a stipulated period of time.
6. Considering such submission made by learned counsels
appearing for the respective parties, this Court deems it proper to
dispose of the writ application at the stage of admission by directing the
petitioner to file a fresh representation taking therein all the grounds
available to him including the fact that similar benefits have already
been extended in favour of 16 nos. and 33 nos. of Civil Engineers vide
order dated 13.08.2018, 16.01.2023, 27.01.2023 and 26.04.2023 under
Annexure-3, 4 and 6 to the writ application. In the event, such a
representation is filed the Opposite Party No.1 shall do well to
reconsider the same in accordance with law taking into consideration
Annexures-3, 4 and 6 within a period of eight weeks from the date
filing of representation of the petitioner. The Opposite party No.1 while
considering the representation of the petitioner shall keep in mind that
similarly situated Civil Engineers have been extended such benefits and
principles has been decided in O.A. No.2237 of 2014 and batch, in the
event, it is found that the petitioner stands in a similar footing with the
Civil Engineers, who have been extended such benefits, similar benefits
be also extended to the petitioner expeditiously.
7. With the aforesaid observations/ directions the writ petition
stands disposed of.
Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.
( A.K. Mohapatra)
Judge
Rubi
Location: High Court of Orisssa, Cuttack
