Orissa High Court
Puspalata Biswal vs State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite ... on 24 January, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.32234 of 2024
Puspalata Biswal ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
Abhiram Swain
-versus-
State Of Odisha & ors. ..... Opposite Parties
Represented By Adv. -
U.C.Jena, A.S.C.
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
MOHAPATRA
ORDER
24.01.2025
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 Standing Counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused
the writ application as well as the documents annexed thereto.
3. The present writ application has been filed by the Petitioner
with a prayer for a direction to the Opposite Parties to fix the scale of
pay of the Petitioner as per the 5th and 6th Pay Commission
recommendation and revise the same under the ORSP Rules, 1998
and 2008 within a stipulated period of time.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that
the Petitioner had earlier approached the Orissa Administrative
Tribunal by filing O.A. No.1850(C) of 2010. The learned Tribunal
took up the aforesaid O.A. along with a batch of other similar O.As.
and the O.As. were disposed of vide a common order dated
22.11.2013. He further submitted that all the employees involved in
the aforesaid O.As. are contract employees and they were claiming
the pay scale as per the 5th and 6th pay commission recommendation.
In course of his argument, he further referred to the judgment of this
Court in W.P.(C) No.2296 of 2021 i.e. in the matter of Basanta
Kumar Dash & Ors. vs. State of Odisha & Ors. and contended that
the present petitioner stands in an identical footing with the said
petitioners. He further submitted that the Petitioners in W.P.(C)
No.2296 of 2021 were also before the Tribunal in O.A. No.1841(C)
of 2010 which was disposed of vide a common order passed in
several other O.As. including the O.A. in which the Petitioner was an
applicant before the Tribunal. In such view of the matter, learned
counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the order passed by this
Court in W.P.(C) No.2296 of 2021 disposed of on 15.05.2024 would
squarely apply to the facts of the present Petitioner's case. He further
contended that the above noted writ application was disposed of by
this Court with a direction to the Opposite Parties to regularize the
service of the Petitioner and upon such regularization the Petitioner
be paid the dues including the pay revision as per the 5 th and 6th pay
commission recommendation on the basis of the Orissa Revised
Scales of Pay Rules, 1998 and 2008 within a period of three months.
5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that the
order passed by this Court in the case of Basanta Kumar Dash's case
(supra) has already been implemented by the Opposite Parties. He
further contended that since the present petitioner stands in a similar
footing with the above named Petitioners in W.P.(C) No.2296 of
2021, by not extending such benefits to the present petitioner would
amount to discrimination and the same would be violative of Article
14 of the Constitution of India.
6. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that
upon perusal of the records it appears that the Petitioner has already
approached the Opposite Party No.1 by filing a representation under
Annexure-9 to the writ application on 18.06.2024. However, he
further submitted that he has no instruction as to whether such a
representation has been actually filed by the Petitioner or not as the
representation filed along with the writ application does not reveal
any endorsement by the Opposite Party No.1. In such view of the
matter, learned counsel for the State submitted in the event this Court
directs the Petitioner to approach the Opposite Party No.1 by filing a
fresh and detailed representation taking therein all the grounds, with
a corresponding direction to the Opposite Party No.1 to consider the
same strictly in accordance with law and in terms of the judgment of
this Court within a stipulated period of time, then he will have no
objection to the same.
7. Considering the submissions of the learned counsels for the
parties, on a careful examination of the background facts as well as
materials on record, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ
application at the stage of admission by granting liberty to the
Petitioner to approach the Opposite Party No.1 by filing a detailed
representation along with a certified copy of this order within a
period of four weeks from today. In such eventuality, the Opposite
Party No.1 shall do well to consider the representation of the
Petitioner strictly in accordance with law by applying the judgments
of this Court as well as Hon'ble Supreme Court as has been referred
to hereinabove and shall make every endeavour to dispose of the
representation by passing a speaking and reasoned order within a
period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of such representation.
The final decision so taken be communicated to the Petitioner within
two weeks from the date of taking such a decision.
8. With the aforesaid observation, the writ application stands
disposed of.
9. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.
( A.K. Mohapatra )
Judge
Anil
Location: High Court of Orissa
