Research › Search › Judgment

Orissa High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 275 (ORI)

Umesh Chandra Pradhan v. State of Orissa

2010-04-13

C.R.DASH

body2010
ORDER 13.04.2010 — Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The present petitioner is working as Lecturer in Economics in L.N. Mohavidyalaya, Jamsuli in the district of Balasore. His appointment has been validated under the provisions of the Orissa Aided Educational Institutions (Appointment of Lecturer Valida¬tion) Act, 1998. He has filed this writ petition challenging, inter alia, non-disbursement of his arrear salary component on the ground that the persons similarly circumstanced with him, who are the teaching staff of the self-same educational institutions, have already been paid arrear salary. This Court vide order dated 16.08.2001 passed in O.J.C. No.9699 of 2001 had directed the opposite parties to consider and dispose of the claim of the petitioner therein, namely, Shivanee Panda and Umesh Chandra Pradhan (who are also lecturers in the self-same educational institution, where the petitioner is serv¬ing) in the light of the decision of this Court in the case of Mrs. Laxmipriya Das v. State of Orissa & others, 92 (2001) CLT 402. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that out of the petitioner’s claim of Rs.1,84,723/- towards arrear salary, the opposite parties have already paid Rs.61,574/- to¬wards part payment and without any reason rest of the amount of the arrear salary has not been disbursed in favour of the peti¬tioner. Regard being had to the judgment of this Court in the case of Mrs. Laxmipriya Das supra and order of this Court in O.J.C. No.9699 of 2001 supra, the writ application is disposed of with the direction that the case of the petitioner be considered by the opposite parties in consonance with the ratio decided and directions issued by this Court in the case of Mrs. Laxmipriya Das supra. It is needless to say here that, for arriving at the decision, the authority concerned shall scrutinize the records relating to the claims of the petitioner to find out the entitle¬ment and genuineness of the claim made by the petitioner, as this Court has not at all addressed the issue on merit. Laxmipriya Das supra. It is needless to say here that, for arriving at the decision, the authority concerned shall scrutinize the records relating to the claims of the petitioner to find out the entitle¬ment and genuineness of the claim made by the petitioner, as this Court has not at all addressed the issue on merit. The exercise should be completed within four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and if the claim of the peti¬tioner is found to be admissible and acceptable, the arrear salary be disbursed within a further period of two months there¬after (i.e. within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order). The writ application is accordingly disposed of. Certified copy of this order be granted as per rules on proper application. Application disposed of.