W.P.(C) No. 22443 of 2016. Case: State of Odisha and Ors. Vs Jogendra Biswal and Ors.. High Court of Orissa (India)
| Case Number | W.P.(C) No. 22443 of 2016 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: Additional Government Advocate and For Respondents: G.A.R. Dora, G. Rani Dora and Priyadarsini Tripathy, Advs. |
| Judges | Sanju Panda and S.N. Prasad, JJ. |
| Issue | Constitution of India - Articles 226, 227 |
| Judgement Date | January 17, 2017 |
| Court | High Court of Orissa (India) |
Judgment:
S.N. Prasad, J.
-
This writ petition has been filed by the State of Odisha invoking jurisdiction conferred upon this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India assailing the order passed by the Odisha Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench dated 11.1.2016 in O.A. No. 4228(C) of 2013, whereby and where under stepping up pay of the opposite party No. 1 has been allowed along with consequential service and financial benefits including retirement benefit as due and admissible.
-
Case of the opposite party No. 1, applicant before the Tribunal, is that pursuant to redesignation of the post of Senior Assistant with effect from 1.1.1981, the opposite party No. 1 as well as Sri P.C. Routray became Senior Assistant and in the said rank P.C. Routray was shown senior to the opposite party No. 1.
The opposite party No. 1 was promoted to the rank of Section Officer, Level-II and joined on 30.3.1988, whereas Sri P.C. Routray was promoted to the said rank with effect from 23.5.1988. Thus P.C. Routray was junior to the opposite party No. 1 in the rank of Section Officer, Level-II.
However, Sri Routray was drawing pay of Rs. 1815/- and the opposite party No. 1 was draying pay of Rs. 1290/-. In the gradation list of Section Officer, Level-II dated 31.12.1996, position of the opposite party No. 1 was at sl. No. 7 above Sri Routray. Vide order dated 13.2.1997 the position of the opposite party No. 1 was modified and shown at sl. No. 34(A) whereas Sri Routray's position was shown at sl. No. 7. The opposite party No. 1 had challenged the same in O.A. No. 490 of 1997 in which the seniority of the opposite party No. 1 fixed at sl. No. 34(A) was quashed and his position was restored to sl. No. 7 with direction to consider his promotion, said order was challenged in O.J.C. No. 7608 of 1999 but the same was dismissed vide order 2.12.2011 and thereafter the opposite party No. 1 was promoted to the rank of Audit Superintendent with effect from 22.2.1997, the date on which Sri Routray joined in the said post and his pay was fixed in the rank of Audit Superintendent at Rs. 6700/-, whereas pay of Sri Routray was fixed at Rs. 7900/-. After promotion, both of them exercised their option to retain the scale of pay in S.O. Level-II and to come over to the scale of pay the post of Audit Superintendent with effect from 1.5.1997.
The competent authority has come out with an order dated 18.2.2013 by which the opposite party No. 1 ought to have been...
To continue reading
Request your trial