Orissa High Court
Rabinarayan Mishra vs State Of Odisha & Others .... Opposite ... on 25 June, 2025
Author: R.K. Pattanaik
Bench: R.K. Pattanaik
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.6335 of 2021
Rabinarayan Mishra .... Petitioner
Mr. Manas Pati, Advocate
-Versus-
State of Odisha & others .... Opposite Parties
Mr. P.K. Swain, AGA
CORAM:
MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK
ORDER
25.06.2025
Order No.
04. 1. Heard Mr. Pati, learned counsel for the petitioner and
Mr. Swain, learned AGA for the State.
2. Instant petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the
impugned decisions as per Annexures-4, 5 & 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subsequently directed to be withdrawn and it was followed by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-4,5 & 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-4,5 & 6 are liable to be interfered
with.
4. Referring to the counter affidavit of opposite party
Nos.1 to 3, Mr. Swain, learned AGA 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 26th
December, 1981 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.
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 Mr. Swain, learned AGA 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, 5 & 6 are liable to be
interfered with followed by consequential directions issued for
compliance by opposite party Nos.2 and 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, 5
& 6 are hereby set aside with the direction to opposite party
Nos.2 and 3 to disburse the pension and pensionary benefits
along with arrears, if any, in favour of the petitioner, since
retired from 31st May, 2020 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.4,600/-.
9. Urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per
rules.
(R.K. Pattanaik)
Judge
Balaram
Designation: Personal Assistant
