Monday, 04, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Durga Prasad Patnaik vs State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 243 Ori

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 243 Ori
Judgement Date : 6 May, 2025

Orissa High Court

Durga Prasad Patnaik vs State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite ... on 6 May, 2025

Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                              WP(C) No.11295 of 2025
            Durga Prasad Patnaik           .....     Petitioner
                                                          Represented By Adv. -
                                                          Saibrata Rath

                                         -versus-
            State Of Odisha & Ors.              .....          Opposite Parties
                                                          Represented By Adv. -
                                                          D. Lenka, A.G.A.

                                                          S.K.Patra, Standing
                                                          Counsel for the A.G.
                                                          (A&E), Odisha

                                  CORAM:
                    THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
                                MOHAPATRA

                                        ORDER

06.05.2025 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 Government Advocate and Mr.S.K.Patra, learned Standing Counsel for Accountant General (A&E), Odisha.

3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the following prayer:

"The Petitioner, therefore, prays that your Lordships would be graciously pleased to admit this writ petition, call for the records and after hearing the parties allow the same, issue writ/writs in the nature of certiorari/mandamus and/or any other further writ/direction, quash the order dated 01.03.2024 under Annexure-1 and direct the Opposite

Parties to authorize the final pension of the Petitioner within a stipulated period."

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner was initially appointed as Village Level Worker on 28.07.1986 under Annexure-3. The said post of Village Level Worker (VLW) was redesignated as Panchayat Executive Officer (PEO) in the year 2015. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further referring to the judgment of the Tribunal which was confirmed by this Court and the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Biharilal Barik and others submitted that the Petitioner is entitled to financial upgradation under the RACP Scheme. Accordingly, he claims for MACP under ORSP Rules, 2017 which has not been considered by the State-Opposite Parties, As such the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present Writ Petition for redressal of his grievance.

5. Learned Additional Government Advocate on the other hand submitted that the ratio laid down in the case of Biharilal Barik-vrs.- State of Orissa by the Tribunal as has been confirmed by this Court as well as the Hon'ble Supreme Court, applies to the Petitioner's case where the grant of benefit under the RACP Scheme is involved. He further submitted that the ratio in Biharilal Barik case is not applied to the facts of the present case. Therefore, the case of the Petitioner is to be considered under the ORSP Rule, 2017 under which the Petitioner is claiming the benefit. He further submitted that the Petitioner has not approached the Departmental Authority before approaching this Court. In such view of the matter, learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that the Petitioner be directed to approach the Departmental Authority before pursuing the

remedy under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

6. Considering the submissions made by learned counsels and upon careful examination of the background facts of the present case and on perusal of the documents annexed to the writ Petition, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the Writ Petition at the stage of admission by directing the Petitioner to approach the Opposite Party No.6 along with certified copy of this order and the copy of the judgment he is relying upon in support of his claim. In the event, the Petitioner approaches the Opposite Party No.6, the Opposite Party No.6 shall do well not only to consider the case of the Petitioner, further he is also directed to comply with the requirements as communicated to him by the Accounts Officer of the Office of Accountant General, Odisha issued under Annexure-1 within a period of six weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. The Opposite Party No.6 is further directed to act on production of certified copy of this order. The decision so taken be communicated to the Petitioner within two weeks thereafter.

7. With the aforesaid observation/direction the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

8. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.

( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Anil

Designation: Junior Stenographer

Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 07-May-2025 17:52:03

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter