Orissa High Court
Sadhu Charan Mangaraj @ vs ) State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Parties on 6 March, 2025
Author: A.K. Mohapatra
Bench: A.K. Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.6452 of 2025
Sadhu Charan Mangaraj @ ..... Petitioner
Majhi
Represented By Adv. -
Basudev Barik
-versus-
1) State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Parties
2) Engineer In Chief, Water Resources Represented By Adv. -
Department Mr.U.C.Jena, ASC
3) Chief Engineer And Basin Manager
Mahanadi Basin, Water Resources
4) Superintending Engineer, Main Dam
Division, Burla
CORAM:
JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA
ORDER
06.03.2025
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. Perused the
Writ Petition as well as the documents annexed thereto.
3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with
the following prayer:
" Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
the Petitioner humbly prays that this Hon'ble Court
may graciously be pleased to :
i) Direct/order that pension, gratuity and other
post retirement benefits shall be sanctioned
and paid to the Petitioner counting his entire
period of service for the purpose of pension as
per the settled position of law.
ii) Direct/order that the unutilised leave salary shall
be paid counting the entire period of service.
iii) Direct/order that the arrear differential
pensionary dues shall carry 12% interest from
the date of entitlement.
And pass any other order/orders,
direction/directions as this Hon'ble Court would be
deem fit and proper as facts and circumstances of the
case."
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner
that the Petitioner was initially appointed on 01.05.1985 in the
post of NMR Mate by the Executive Engineer, Mahanadi
Barrage Stores & Mechanical Division, Gandarpur, Cuttack.
Thereafter, the Petitioner continued to service uninterruptedly.
For regularization of service of the Petitioner, the Petitioner
had approached the authority by filing representations. In the
meantime, the Notification of the Finance Department dated
15.05.1997 had come into force. Accordingly, learned counsel
for the Petitioner submitted that in view of such Notification, the
Petitioner should have been brought over to the Work Charge
establishment. Thereafter his services have been regularized
as has been provided in the Resolution dated 15.05.1997.
However, the same was not done by the authority by deviating
the Notification dated 15.05.1997. On 01.09.2009, the
Petitioner was brought over to the Work Charged
establishment. Thereafter he was posted transferred in the
Office of the Executive Engineer, Mahanadi Chitrutpala Island
Irrigation Division, Manijanga, Jagatsinghpur, then he was
transferred to Superintending Engineer, Dranage Circle,
Cuttack. While the matter stood thus, on 01.12.2018 Finance
Department, government of Odisha issued a Resolution
thereby regularizing the services of Work Charged/NMR/Job
Contract employees. However, despite such Resolution the
services of the Petitioner cannot be regularised. Finally, on
15.04.2019 the Petitioner submitted a representation before
the Opposite parties for regularization of his service. Finally on
01.04.2023 the services of the Petitioner was regularized as
per the decision of the Government in the post of Patrol and
posted at Superintending Engineer, Main Dam Division, Burla,
Sambalpur. Finally, the Petitioner was retired from service on
31.05.2024 on attaining the age of superannuation from the
post of Patrol. In view of the aforesaid factual background,
learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Opposite
Party No.2 be directed to pay the pensionary benefit to the
Petitioner taking into consideration the past service rendered
by the Petitioner both as NMR as well as his service rendered
in the Work Charged establishment. Accordingly, the Petitioner
has approached this Court for a direction to the Opposite
Parties to pay the retirement benefit as well as the pensionary
benefit as is due and admissible to the Petitioner.
5. Learned Additional Government Advocate on the other
hand contended that since the Petitioner does not have the
qualifying service period, he is not entitled to pensionary
benefit. Accordingly, the authorities have not considered the
case of the Petitioner for grant of pensionary benefit. However,
with regard to payment of retiral dues, learned Additional
Government Advocate submitted that the amount as is due ad
admissible to the Petitioner has already been paid to the
Petitioner on his superannuation from service. Accordingly it
was submitted that the Writ Petition was devoid of merit and
the same be dismissed.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on
careful examination of the background facts of the present
case and keeping in view the well settled position of law that
once an employee who was working initially as NMR,
thereafter brought over to Work Charged establishment and
finally, his service was regularized shall be considered for
payment of pensionary benefit by taking into consideration as
how much period of service rendered in Work charged and
NMR establishment, calculate the minimum qualifying period of
service for grant of pensionary benefit. Such a proposition of
law as has been propounded by this Court has already been
accepted by many judgments of this Court. Keeping in view the
aforesaid legal position, this Court deems it proper to dispose
of the Writ Petition by directing the Opposite Parties to
calculate the minimum qualifying service period of the
Petitioner taking the shortfall period from the service period of
the Petitioner as work Charged employee/NMR to calculate the
minimum qualifying service period, the benefit which is due
and admissible to the Petitioner on the basis of his last pay
drawn accordingly, the same be sanctioned and disbursed to
the Petitioner within a period of two months from the date of
communication of the certified copy of this order. In the event,
the Petitioner though is getting any other pensionary benefit,
the same shall be surrendered before the Government. Any
decision taken be communicated to the Petitioner within 10
days of taking such decision.
7. With the aforesaid observation, the writ application
stands disposed of.
8. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.
( A.K. Mohapatra )
Judge
RKS
Location: High Court of Orissa
