Orissa High Court
Jaya Singh Puta vs State Of Orissa & Others ... Opposite ... on 24 June, 2025
Author: R.K. Pattanaik
Bench: R.K. Pattanaik
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.15173 of 2021
Jaya Singh Puta ... Petitioner
Mr. Manas Pati, Advocate
-Versus-
State of Orissa & others ... Opposite parties
Ms. B. Dash, ASC
CORAM:
MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK
ORDER
24.06.2025
Order No.
04. 1. Heard Mr. Pati, learned counsel for the petitioner and
Ms. Dash, learned ASC for the State.
2. Instant writ petition is filed by the petitioner
challenging the impugned decisions as per Annexures-4 & 6 to
the extent of Grade Pay payable to him in view of Annexure-2
taking into account Annexure-3 on the grounds stated therein.
3. Mr. Pati, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
after the decision as per Annexure-2, the Grade Pay was allowed
in favour of the petitioner and others, which was subsequently
directed to be withdrawn and it was followed by the impugned
orders i.e. Annexures-4 & 6. It is further submitted that the case
of the petitioner is covered by the decision in Prasanna Kumar
Gochhayat Vrs. State of Odisha & others 2025 SCC OnLine
Ori 172 which has been followed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this
Court in Dillip Kumar Biswal Vrs. State of Odisha & others
in W.P.(C) No.16776 of 2021 and in other identical cases. The
contention of Mr. Pati, learned counsel is that the petitioner is
entitled to 3rd RACP as it was originally allowed even though he
held an ex-cadre post and this Court in Prasanna Kumar
Gochhayat (supra) concluded that such post or even an isolated
post hold is entitled to the benefit of RACP under the ORSP
Rules. Considering the decision in Prasanna Kumar
Gochhayat (supra) and as Co-ordinate Bench in Dillip Kumar
Biswal (supra) has considered such grant of 2nd RACP and since
the petitioner is similarly circumstanced, it is lastly submitted
that he should be granted the benefit and therefore, the impugned
decisions as per Annexures-4 & 6 are liable to be interfered with.
4. Referring to the counter affidavit of opposite party
Nos.1 to 3, Ms. Dash, learned ASC for the State submits that
Revised Assured Career Progression Scheme (RACPS) has been
implemented on 1st January, 2013 by the Government of Odisha
in Finance Department Resolution dated 6th February, 2013 and
according to one of the conditions therein, the employees of the
cadre having promotional hierarchy shall receive the Grade Pay
of the promotional post and in respect of employees in
isolated/ex-cadre posts not having any such promotional
hierarchy to receive the next higher Grade Pay as per the First
Schedule of ORSP Rules, 2008 and therefore, the case of the
petitioner was revised and the 3rd RACP was rightly withdrawn
as per Annexure-6.
5. As earlier stated, 3rd RACP was allowed in favour of
the petitioner as per Annexure-2, who joined in service on 6th
May, 1985 and upon completion of 30 years of service, he was
entitled to Grade Pay of Rs.4,600/-. Referring to Annexure-3, a
copy of the information received under the RTI Act, Mr. Pati,
learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
though joined as Check Gate Clerk has had prospects of
promotion to the post of Weigh Bridge Supervisor and thereafter
as Transport Supervisor and in any case, in view of judgment of
the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Prasanna Kumar
Gochhayat (supra), the RACP is allowed even in respect of
isolated/ex-Cadre posts and therefore, the petitioner is eligible
for 3rd RACP w.e.f. 6th May, 2015.
6. Considering the facts pleaded on record and the
submissions of learned counsel for the respective parties and in
view of decision in Prasanna Kumar Gochhayat (supra), this
Court is inclined to hold that the petitioner should be allowed the
Grade Pay of Rs.4,600/- he having joined as Check Gate Clerk
carrying promotional avenue to the higher posts as made to
reveal from Annexure-3. It is to reiterate that in similarly
situated case, this Court in Dillip Kumar Biswal (supra) has
directed such Grade Pay taking into account the decision in
Prasanna Kumar Gochhayat (supra). In other words, recording
the submission of Ms. Dash, learned ASC for the State with
reference to counter affidavit, considering the reply of the State
and response received through rejoinder affidavit of the
petitioner and submission of Mr. Pati, learned counsel for the
petitioner, this Court reaches at a conclusion that the impugned
orders at Annexures-4 & 6 are liable to be interfered with
followed by consequential directions issued for compliance by
opposite party Nos.2 & 3.
7. Accordingly, it is ordered.
8. In the result, the writ petition stands allowed. As a
necessary corollary, the impugned orders as at Annexures-4 & 6
are hereby set aside with the direction to opposite party Nos.2 &
3 to disburse the pension and pensionary benefits along with
arrears, if any, in favour of the petitioner, since retired from 31st
May, 2024 concluding the above exercise as early as possible
preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt
of a copy of the order with the entitlement of Grade Pay of
Rs.4,200/- w.e.f. 01.01.2013 & Grade Pay of Rs.4,600/- w.e.f.
06.05.2015.
9. Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per rules.
(R.K. Pattanaik)
Judge
TUDU
