SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Ori) 396

S.PANDA, S.K.PANIGRAHI
Chandra Nandi – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


JUDGMENT

1. This matter is taken up through video conferencing.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. By way of this Writ Petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 11.06.2009 passed by the learned State Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack in O.A. No.1513 (C )of 2009. The petitioner has further prayed for a direction to the opposite parties to release the pension, gratuity and retrial benefits to the petitioner.

4. This writ petition was disposed of on 24.1.2014 with a direction as follows:-

    'We therefore direct that the petitioner should be treated to have been regularized in service at least one day prior to his superannuation notionally and we further direct that calculating his entitlements, his pension amount shall be fixed by the opposite parties - State, in accordance with the rules and the arrear pension of the petitioner so calculated shall be paid to the petitioner by the end of March, 2014 and further the monthly payment of pension shall be made to the petitioner regularly thereafter.'

5. However, the above order was challenged by the StateOpposite parties in Civil Appeal No.10690 of 2017 and the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide its judgment dated 1.4

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top