[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Krishna Chandra Pradhan vs State Of Odisha And Others ..... ... on 23 April, 2026
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.12318 of 2026
Krishna Chandra Pradhan ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. Sushanta Kumar
Mishra
-versus-
State of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties
Represented By Adv. -
Mr. S.K. Parhi, ASC
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA
ORDER
23.04.2026
Order No.
01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.
2. On the prayer of the learned counsel for the Petitioner, he is
permitted to correct the name of the Petitioner in the cause title of the
writ petition.
3. Corrected copy of the cause title of the writ petition filed in
Court today is accepted and taken on record.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as the
learned counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ
petition as well as the documents annexed thereto.
5. The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner with the
following prayers:-
"It is therefore, most humbly prayed that this
Hon'ble Court may be graciously pleased to:
i) Admit the writ application;
ii) Call for the records;
iii) direct the Opp. Parties to release the final
pension, gratuity other retrial benefits in favour of the
petitioner and the petitioner retired from the Service on
dtd.31.05.2020 on attaining the age of superannuation
and the same pending before the Controller of
Accounts, Odisha, Bhubaneswar pursuant to the letter
issued by the District Education Officer, Sambalpur
vide letter dtd.30.10.2025 under Annexure-4.
And further be pleased to pass any other
order(s)/direction(s) as would be deemed just and
proper in the interest of justice."
6. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at the outset, contended that
the Petitioner was initially appointed on 27.06.1982 as an Assistant
Teacher. Thereafter, while he is continuing in service, the Petitioner
was promoted to the post of Headmaster. Finally, on attaining the age
of superannuation the Petitioner has retired from service w.e.f.
31.05.2020. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at this juncture,
contended that after his retirement from service, the Petitioner has
been sanctioned and disbursed the provisional pension by the Opposite
Parties. The grievance of the Petitioner in the present writ petition is
confined to the prayer that the Petitioner has not been paid his final
pensionary benefits as well as gratuity. In such view of the matter,
learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that the conduct of the
Opposite Parties in the case of the Petitioner is grossly illegal and
arbitrary. Hence, the present writ petition be allowed and the Opposite
Parties be directed to extend the benefits as is due and admissible to
the Petitioner within a stipulated period of time.
7. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submitted that
ventilating his grievance, the Petitioner has already approached the
Opposite Parties No.2 and 4, who are the competent authorities, for
redressal of his grievance by filing a representation dated 18.03.2026
at Annexure-5, which is stated to be pending before the said Opposite
Parties for taking final decision on it. He further submitted that the
case of the Petitioner has already been recommended by the District
Education Officer, Sambalpur, Opposite Party No.3 by virtue of letter
dated 03.10.2025 at Annexure-4. Despite such recommendation, no
final decision has been taken and the Petitioner has not been disbursed
his financial benefits.
8. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, contended that
he has no specific instruction in the matter. He further submitted that
on a careful analysis of the submission made by the learned counsel
for the Petitioner, further on close scrutiny of the pleadings as well as
the documents annexed to the writ petition, it is found that the
Petitioner has approached the Opposite Parties No.2 and 4 for
redressal of his grievance. He further submitted that in the event no
final decision is taken with regard to the Petitioner's claim by the
Opposite Parties No.2 and 4, he will have no objection in the event this
Court directs the Opposite Parties No.2 & 4 to take a lawful decision
with regard to the claim of the Petitioner within a stipulated period of
time.
9. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsels
appearing for the respective parties, on a careful examination of the
background facts of the present case, as well as 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 Opposite
Parties No.2 and 4 to consider the grievance of the Petitioner as
involved in the present writ petition dated 18.03.2026 at Annexure-5
strictly in accordance with law and keeping in view the
recommendation of the District Education Officer, Sambalpur vide his
letter dated 30.10.2025 under Annexure-4 and pass necessary
consequential orders within a period of eight weeks from the date of
communication of this order. The representation of the Petitioner shall
be disposed of by passing a speaking and reasoned order. It is further
directed that in the event it is found that the Petitioner is entitled to the
financial benefits as has been claimed by the Petitioner and that the
Petitioner has no laches, the Opposite Parties shall extend the same as
permissible in law along with original claim of the Petitioner within a
period of six weeks from the date of taking such decision.
10. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition
stands disposed of.
( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra )
Judge
Debasis
