Orissa High Court
Sarata Kumar Dash vs ) State Of Odisha on 28 January, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.1540 of 2025
Sarata Kumar Dash ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Manoj Panigrahi
-versus-
1) State Of Odisha, represented by ..... Opposite Parties
the Secretary to Government,
Finance Department, Government
of Odisha, Lokseba Bhawan,
Bhubaneswar
2) The Department of General Represented By Adv. -
Administration & Public Smt. Sasmita Nayak,
Grievance, represented by its ASC
Secretary, Government of Odisha,
Lokseba Bhawan, Bhubaneswar.
3) The Controller of Accounts,
Odisha
4) The Director, Municipal
Administration And OSD-cum-Spl,
Secretary to Government,
Bhubaneswar.
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA
ORDER
28.01.2025
Order No.
01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement
(Virtual /Physical Mode).
2. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as
learned counsel for the State-Opposite Parties.
3. The writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner with a
prayer to quash the order dated 21.05.2024 passed by the
Opposite Party No.4-Director, Municipal Administration &
OSD-cum-Spl. Secretary to Government of Odisha, Housing &
Urban Development, Bhubaneswar under Annexure-3 and to
direct the Opposite Parties to release the pension along with
other pensionary benefits as is due and admissible in his favour.
4. It is stated by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that
while the Petitioner was in service, he was entangled in a
Vigilance Case bearing T.R. Case No.30 of 2015 and,
accordingly, vide judgment dated 27.04.2023 he has been
convicted in the said case by the learned Special Judge
(Vigilance), Bhubaneswar. As against the aforesaid judgment of
conviction, the Petitioner has preferred an appeal before this
Court which has been registered as Criminal Appeal No.504 of
2023. The appeal so preferred before this Court has been
admitted and the same is pending for hearing. Learned counsel
for the Petitioner, at this juncture, submitted that the Petitioner,
who is a poor person, is unable to sustain himself and his family
as he is not getting any pensionary benefits.
5. On perusal of the factual background of the present case, it
appears that the Petitioner has been convicted in a Vigilance
Case, therefore, the authorities have stopped his pensionary
benefits under the Pension Rules.
6. However, considering the fact that the hearing of the
appeal is likely to take a long time, the writ petition is being
disposed of by granting liberty to the Petitioner to approach the
Opposite Party No.4 with an application for grant of provisional
pension. In the event any such application is filed by the
Petitioner within a period of two weeks from today, the Opposite
Party No.4 shall do well to consider the same keeping in view
the observations made hereinabove and in terms of the
concerned rules and the application of the Petitioner be disposed
of within a period of six weeks from the date of communication
of a copy of this order by the Petitioner.
( A.K. Mohapatra )
Judge
Debasis
