Orissa High Court
Binod Kumar Samal vs State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite ... on 5 March, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.4792 of 2025
Binod Kumar Samal ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
Suryakanta Dwibedi
-versus-
State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties
Represented By Adv. -
M.R. Patra, A.S.C.
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
MOHAPATRA
ORDER
05.03.2025
Order No.
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 Standing Counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused
the writ application as well as the documents annexed thereto.
3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the
following prayer:
"It is therefore, most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble
Court may graciously be pleased to:
1. Admit the writ application.
2. Call for the records.
3. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the Opp. Parties to
regularise the service of the petitioner from the date of
brought over to the work charged establishment taking
into account the long and uninterrupted twenty-seven
(27) years of service and extend all the consequential
financial service benefits as due and admissible for the
post on being regularisation with retrospective effect i.e.
from the date 28.02.2009 by treating the petitioner as a
regular employee within a stipulated period of time as
fixed by this Hon'ble Court.
And pass any other order/orders or direction/
directions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper;"
4. It is stated by learned counsel for the Petitioner that although
the Petitioner had rendered more than 27 years of continuous service
as NMR and his service was regularized subsequently in the year
2019 vide order dated 27.09.2019, the Petitioner has not been paid
pension and pensionary benefits. Being aggrieved by such conduct of
the Opposite Parties, the Petitioner has approached this Court by
filing the present writ application. In course of his argument, learned
counsel for the Petitioner referred to the judgment of this Court in Sk.
Abdul Motalib vs. State of Odisha and Anr. in W.P.(C) No.32200 of
2022 disposed of vide order dated 04.01.2023. He further contended
that the aforesaid ratio has been confirmed by the Division Bench in
a connected matter. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for
the Petitioner contended that the case of the Petitioner be considered
in the light of the ratio laid down in Sk. Abdul Motalib's case
(supra).
5. Learned Additional Standing Counsel on the other hand
contended that the Petitioner has not approached the Opposite Parties
before approaching this Court by filing the present writ application.
In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the State submitted
that he will have no objection in the event this Court directs the
Opposite Party No.2 by filing a fresh representation taking therein all
the grounds with a corresponding direction to the Opposite Party
No.2 to consider the same in accordance with law and dispose of
such representation within a stipulated period of time.
7. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels for
the parties, on a careful examination of the background facts as well
as materials on record, further keeping in view the limited nature of
the grievance of the Petitioner, 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.2 by filing a
detailed representation along with supporting documents and any
judgments in support of his contention along with a certified copy of
this order within a period of two weeks from today. In such
eventuality, the Opposite Party No.2 shall do well to consider the
representation of the Petitioner strictly in accordance with law and
judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as this Court. The
representation of the Petitioner shall be considered and disposed of
within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of
the representation. While considering the representation of the
Petitioner, the Opposite Party No.2 shall do well to take into
consideration the ratio laid down by this Court in Sk. Abdul
Motalib's case (supra). 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 observations/ directions, 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, Cuttack
