Orissa High Court
State Of Odisha vs Srikanta Sarangi on 2 May, 2025
Bench: K.R. Mohapatra, R.K. Pattanaik
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY
Reason: Authentication
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK
Date: 17-May-2025 12:07:31
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No. 16853 OF 2018
(An application under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India)
*****
1. State of Odisha,
Represented through its Principal Secretary,
Higher Education Department,
Secretariat Building,
Bhubaneswar, Dist: Khordha
2. Director, Higher Education, Odisha,
Heads of Department Building,
Bhubaneswar, Dist: Khordha,
3. Principal, BJB (Autonomous) College,
Bhubaneswar, Dist: Khordha,
4. Additional Chief Secretary,
Finance Department, Odisha Secretariat,
Bhubaneswar, Dist: Khordha ...... Petitioners
-Versus-
1. Srikanta Sarangi,
S/o late Bankanidhi Sarangi, near Sidha Mahavir Temple,
PO/PS: Puri
presently working as Demonstrator,
Chemistry Department, BJB (Autonomous) College,
Bhubaneswar, Dist: Khordha,
2. Registrar, Odisha Administrative Tribunal,
Bhubaneswar, Dist: Khordha
....... Opp. Parties
Advocates appeared:
For Petitioners : Mr. Swayambhu Mishra
Additional Standing Counsel
For Opp. Parties : Mr. Manoj Kumar Mohanty,
Advocate
(For Opp. Party No.1)
W.P.(C) No. 16853 OF 2018 Page 1 of 8
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY
Reason: Authentication
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK
Date: 17-May-2025 12:07:31
// 2 //
CORAM :
MR. JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
MR. JUSTICE R.K. PATTANAIK
------------------------------------------------
Heard and disposed of on 02.05.2025
----------------------------------------------
JUDGMENT
By the Bench;
1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. State of Odisha and its functionaries under Higher
Education Department, being the Petitioners have filed this
writ petition assailing the order dated 18th April, 2017
(Annexure-2) passed by learned State Administrative Tribunal,
Odisha, Bhubaneswar (for brevity 'learned Tribunal') in O.A.
No.373 of 2017, whereby it was held that the Opposite Party
No.1 is entitled to 2nd RACP with Grade Pay of Rs.5,400/- and
3rd RACP with Grade Pay of Rs.6,600/-.
3. The fact in nutshell relevant for proper adjudication of
this case is that the Opposite Party No.1 was appointed as
Demonstrator in Chemistry at B.J.B. College, Bhubaneswar on
2nd January, 1989. The scale of pay of Opposite Party No.1
was Rs.9,300-Rs.34,800/- in the Pay Band-2 as per the
provisions of Odisha Revised Scale of Pay Rules, 2008.
3.1. Pursuant to the office order dated 8th July, 2013 of G.A.
Department, Opposite Party No.1 was classified to be a Group-
'B' category employee. The Government of Odisha in Finance
Department, vide Resolution No.3560/F dated 6th February,
2013, introduced Revised Assured Career Progression Scheme
Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK
Date: 17-May-2025 12:07:31
// 3 //
(RACPS) for government employees, which came into force
with effect from 1st January, 2013. It was provided therein that
there shall be three financial up-gradations under RACPS, on
completion of 10, 20 and 30 years of service in a single cadre
counted from the direct entry grade in absence of promotion.
There was no promotional avenue for the post of Demonstrators.
The scale of pay of the Opposite Party No.1 was fixed at
Rs.16,210/- with Grade Pay of Rs.4,600/- on completion of 10
years of service and at Rs.16,840/- with grade pay of Rs.5400/-
as on 01.01.2013 on completion of 20 years of service under
RACP vide Office Order No.110 dated 21st January, 2014 issued
by the Principal of B.J.B. College, Bhubaneswar.
3.2. After getting 2nd RACP with effect from 1st January,
2013, the annual increment was granted to Opposite Party No.1
and scale of pay was fixed at Rs.17,540/- with Grade Pay of
Rs.5,400/- with effect from 1st September, 2013 vide Office
Order No.113 dated 21st January, 2014 of the Principal, BJB
College, Bhubaneswar. However, Higher Education Department
issued Order No.24 dated 1st January, 2015 indicating that in
most of the cases, pay of Group- 'C' and 'D' employees of the
Government Colleges under RACPS was not fixed correctly.
Thus, it was observed therein that excess amount of Grade Pay
has been paid to Group- 'C' and 'D' employees at the time of
fixation of the pay under RACP Scheme. It was, thus, held that
they are not actually entitled to Grade Pay allowed to them. On
the basis of the said letter, the Grade Pay of Opposite Party No.1
Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK
Date: 17-May-2025 12:07:31
// 4 //
was reduced from Rs.5,400/- to Rs.4,800/- on 2nd up-gradation.
The pay was completely revised and fixed at Rs.16,830/- with
grade pay of Rs.4,600/- on 01.01.2013 at Rs.16,830/- with grade
pay of RS.4,800/- on 08.08.2013, Rs.17,460/- with grade pay of
RS.4,800/- on 01.09.2013 and Rs.18,130/- with grade pay of
RS.4,800/- on 01.09.2014, vide Office order No.130 dated 20th
January, 2015 and the excess amount of Rs.60,153/- paid to him
was directed to be recovered vide Letter No.149 dated 22nd
January, 2015. Being aggrieved by the said order of re-fixation
of Grade Pay and recovery of excess amount paid, the Opposite
Party No.1 filed O.A. No. 373 of 2017. Learned Tribunal, vide
order dated 18th April, 2017 (Annexure-2), allowed O.A. No.373
of 2017 and quashed the Office Order No.130 dated 20th January,
2015 by which the Grade Pay of Opposite Party No.1 was
reduced and he was asked to refund the amount received by him
towards revised grade pay under the RACPS. Further, learned
Tribunal held that Opposite Party No.1 is entitled to Grade Pay
of Rs.5,400/- on 2nd up-gradation and Rs.6,600/- on 3rd up-
gradation under RACPS. The State Government was directed to
refund the amount recovered from Opposite Party No.1. Being
aggrieved, this writ petition has been filed.
4. Mr. Mishra, learned Additional Standing Counsel
makes elaborate submission on merit of the writ petition. He,
however, submits that the writ petitions, involving similar
issue filed by the State Government, have already been
disposed of by this Court and the SLP(C) filed against the said
Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK
Date: 17-May-2025 12:07:31
// 5 //
orders, have been dismissed. In some cases, order passed by
learned Tribunal has been implemented. He also referred to the
affidavit filed by Opposite Party No.1 to buttress his argument.
It is his submission that assailing the order passed in a similar
writ petition, the State of Odisha had moved the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in SLP(C) Diary No.26472 of 2023 (State of
Odisha Vs. Vijayananda Paricha). Hon'ble Supreme Court
taking into consideration the order passed in SLP(C) Diary No.
9250 of 2023 (The State of Odisha and others Vs. Surama
Manjiri Das and others) and similar such orders, dismissed
the SLP(C). However, the said order by this Court as well by
Hon'ble Supreme Court was not passed on merit. The writ
petition of similar nature was dismissed on the ground of
limitation and the SLP(C) filed against the said order was
dismissed. Pursuant to the said order passed by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court, Government of Odisha in the Department of
Higher Education issued Order No.48725 dated 8th November,
2023, the relevant portion of which is quoted hereunder:
"The State Govt. had preferred Writ petition
bearing No.17711/2022 before the Hon'ble High Court
of Orissa challenging the order dtd. 12.03.2018 passed
by the Learned Odisha Administrative Tribunal,
Bhubaneswar in O.A. No.15(B) /2017. Hon'ble High
Court had dismissed the writ petition on the ground on
delay and latches vide order No.2, dtd. 26.07.2022.
The State again preferred SLP before the
Hon'ble Supreme Court Vide SLP (Civil) Dy. No.(S)
25417/2023 against the order dtd. 26.07.2023 of
Hon'ble High Court of Orissa and Hon'ble Supreme
Court have dismissed the SLP on 21.07.2023 barred by
time.
Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK
Date: 17-May-2025 12:07:31
// 6 //
Consequent upon such dismissal order of
Hon'ble Court vis-à-vis having exhaustion of all legal
remedies, Government have been pleased to allow
Grade Pay Rs.5400/- as 2nd RACP on completion of 20
years of service from 01.03.2013 and Grade Pay
Rs.6600/- on completion 30 years of service from
September, 2013 to the petitioner with the condition
that this will have no binding effect on the merit of
similarly situated cases."
(emphasis supplied)
4.1. He, therefore submits that while implementing the
order passed by learned Tribunal in similar such O.As, the
State Government put a condition that such implementation
will have no binding effect on the merit of similarly situated
cases. Thus, he submits that the writ petition should be
adjudicated on its own merit without being influenced by the
order passed in similar such writ petitions as well as dismissal
of SLP(C) by Hon'ble the Supreme Court.
5. Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel for Opposite Party No.1
vehemently objects to the same and submits that the law is no
more res-integra. In the case of Surama Manjiri Das and
others (supra), learned Tribunal has passed a reasoned order,
which was also confirmed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.15763
of 2021. Hon'ble Supreme Court, while entertaining SLP(C)
Diary No.9259 of 2023 challenging the judgment in Surama
Manjiri Das and others (supra), dismissed the SLP(C) with the
following order:
"Delay condoned.
Having regard to the basis on which the High
Court dismissed the State's writ petition, we see no
reason to interfere with impugned judgment. The
Special Leave Petition is accordingly dismissed.
However, the question of law, if any, is kept open.
Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK
Date: 17-May-2025 12:07:31
// 7 //
Pending application(s), if any, stand closed."
He, therefore, submits that the order passed by learned
Tribunal in similar such cases including Surama Manjiri Das
and others (supra) have been tested by this Court as well as
Hon'ble Supreme Court and they refused to interfere with the
order of the learned Tribunal. Since in similar such cases, the
order of learned Tribunal has been implemented by the State
Government, there is no reason to discriminate the Opposite
Party No.1 in the instant case. As such, the writ petition is
liable to be dismissed.
6. We heard learned counsel for the parties and perused
the respective pleadings as well as materials placed before us.
7. Considering the rival contentions of the parties and
discussing the facts as well as law involved, learned Tribunal
in O.A. No. 373 of 2017 held as under:
"In view of the above decision, all the O.As. are
allowed and the Annexure-6 dated 1.1.2015 issued by
respondent no.1 is quashed. The applicants who have
been granted grade pay of Rs.5400/- in terms of 2nd
upgradation and Rs.6600/- in terms of 3rd
upgradation under RACP will continue. The
respondents are further directed to refund the
recovered amount in terms of Annexure-7/1 within a
period of three months from the date of receipt of a
copy of this order.
Accordingly, all the O.As. are disposed of."
In similar such cases, the State of Odisha has filed writ
petitions before this Court, which are dismissed. The State of
Odisha also tried its luck before the Hon'ble Supreme Court
and was unsuccessful.
Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK
Date: 17-May-2025 12:07:31
// 8 //
8. It is informed to the Court that in similar such cases
where the SLP(C) have been dismissed, the order of learned
Tribunal has been implemented by allowing the benefit of 2 nd
and 3rd RACP with Grade Pay of Rs.5,400/- and Rs.6,600/-
respectively.
9. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, this Court
finds no reason to take a different view in the present writ
petition. We have also perused the order passed by learned
Tribunal and find that learned Tribunal discussing the facts
and law involved and relying upon a case involving identical
issue passed a reasoned order. The condition imposed by the
State Government while implementing the order to the effect
that it will not have a binding effect in similar cases has no
legal basis. No ground is made out by Mr. Mishra, learned
ASC to distinguish this case from the one relied upon by the
Opposite Party No.1 either on facts or on law. Thus, we find
no merit in the present writ petition.
10. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. In the
facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as
to costs.
Urgent certified copy of this judgment be granted on
proper application.
(K.R. Mohapatra)
(K.R. Mohapatra)
Judge
(R.K. Pattanaik)
Judge
Orissa High Court, Cuttack,
Dated 2nd May, 2025/Madhusmita
