Research › Search › Judgment

Orissa High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 29 (ORI)

Renuka Dhal v. State of Odisha

2016-01-13

B.R.SARANGI

body2016
ORDER : B.R. Sarangi, J. 1. Heard Mr. B.K. Routray, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A.K. Pandey, learned Standing Counsel for School and Mass Education Department. The petitioner files this application seeking for a direction to opposite parties to sanction and grant family pension and T.I. to her with immediate effect and all her arrear dues may be calculated and be paid to her within a stipulated time. 2. Mr. B.K. Routray, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the husband of the petitioner, who was working as Primary School Teacher died on 06.05.1984 leaving behind the petitioner. After the death of husband of the petitioner, the petitioner has not been granted the family pension and T.I. which is admissible to her because of the reason that the benefit was conferred upon the legal heirs of the deceased Primary School Teacher w.e.f. 01.09.1988. Since death of the deceased has been occurred prior to the cutoff date, the same has not been extended to her. He further submits that the claim of the petitioner is covered by the judgment of this Court in Subarna Dibya and others v. State of Orissa and others, 2005 (I) OLR 168 . 3. Mr. A.K. Pandey, learned Standing Counsel for School and Mass Education Department submits that the judgment of this Court in Subarna Dibya (supra) has been challenged before the apex Court in SLP (C) No. 14265-14326/2005 and the same is pending for adjudication and the claim of the petitioner can only be adjusted after disposal of the said SLP. 4. It is stated that in the meantime the said SLP has been dismissed by the apex Court and the case of the petitioner can be considered in view of the Subarna Dibya (supra). 5. Considering the contention raised by learned Counsel for the parties and after going through the records, since the appeal preferred by the State in Comnr-cum-Sec. Govt. SC & Mass Ed. Dept & Anr. v. Subarna Dibya and others (in SLP (C) No. 14265-14326/2005) has been dismissed by the apex Court, the grievance of the petitioner can be considered in the light of the judgment passed by this Court in Subarna Dibya (supra). SC & Mass Ed. Dept & Anr. v. Subarna Dibya and others (in SLP (C) No. 14265-14326/2005) has been dismissed by the apex Court, the grievance of the petitioner can be considered in the light of the judgment passed by this Court in Subarna Dibya (supra). so far as entitlement of the petitioner is concerned, the same has to be determined in the ratio decided in Subarna Dibya (supra)'and which has been confirmed by the apex Court, therefore, there is no dispute with regard to determination of the family pension of the petitioner. In that view of the matter, let the opposite party No. 1 consider the case of the petitioner for release of family pension and Tl in terms of Subarna Dibya (supra) within a period of four months from the date of communication of this order. 6. With the above observation and direction, for writ petition stands disposed of. 7. Requisites for communication of this order to opposite party No. 1 shall be filed within a week. Issue urgent certified copy as per rules subject to filing of requisites. Disposed off