Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
K.R.MOHAPATRA, ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA
Laxmikanta Dhal – Appellant
Versus
State Of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's history and claims for pension (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments regarding irregular recruitment and age limit (Para 4 , 7) |
| 3. court's review of recruitment tests and petitioner’s confirmation (Para 5 , 6 , 8) |
| 4. quashing of denial for pensionary benefits (Para 9) |
| 5. writ petition allowed without cost (Para 10) |
JUDGMENT :
1. The Petitioner in this Writ Petition prays for a direction to set aside the Order No.247 dated 17th August, 2022 (Annexure-8) passed by learned District and Sessions Judge, Bhadrak whereby pensionary benefits to the Petitioner have been denied.
2. Mr. Mukherjee, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner was appointed as a Junior Clerk in Balasore- Bhadrak Judgeship vide Order dated 4th July,1986 (Annexure-1). But, the selection process by which the Petitioner was selected held to be irregular and all candidates including the Petitioner were terminated from service. To ameliorate problems faced by the terminated employees, the Government of Odisha in the Department of General Administration vide Letter No.9197 dated 30th March, 1991 (Annexure-3) brought out a circular for regularization of the irregular
The denial of pensionary benefits based on non-appearance in recruitment tests is unjustified when the candidate was age-barred and confirmed in service.
Pensionary benefits cannot be denied based on conditions rendered impossible due to governmental inaction; continuous service and promotions warrant recognition of entitlement.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement of pensionary benefits for employees appointed prior to a certain date and subsequently regularized, as well as the requirement to ....
The court held that employees regularized despite not formally joining are still entitled to pensionary benefits, emphasizing fairness in public employment rights.
Continuous service in a sanctioned post qualifies for pension benefits, despite delays in regularization, as per the Bihar State Universities Act.
Employee claims for pension must be considered in light of prior judicial rulings on regularization, asserting rights after prolonged service without due process.
Inaction by the State in not regularizing long-serving employees cannot deprive them of valid pension benefits under existing rules, irrespective of completed qualifying service requirements.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
