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

2026 Supreme(Ori) 433

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
SANJEEB K.PANIGRAHI, J.
Odisha Hydro Power Corporation Ltd., Bhubaneswar & Ors. – Petitioners
Versus
Golak Chandra Swain & Ors. - Opposite Parties
RVWPET No. 243 of 2024
Decided On : 27-02-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Durga Prasad Nanda, Sr. Adv. Along with associates
For the Opposite Parties : Ms. Gayatri Patra, ASC Mr. Kunal Ku. Swain, Adv. Mr. S.C.D. Dash, Adv.

Review jurisdiction is limited to correcting errors apparent on the record and does not allow for re-examination of the merits of a case.

Headnote:(A) Review Jurisdiction - Powers of the Court - The judgment of 08.05.2024 was reviewed based on the parameters for review, including errors apparent on record, non-consideration of material facts, and legal rights. The review petition was dismissed due to lack of an apparent error and an attempt to reargue the case (Paras 17-26).

(B) Employment Law - Pay Scale - The case pertains to revision of pay scales for the petitioner, emphasizing that recommendations do not equate to rights without formal acceptance by authorities. The court found no patent error in concluding the administrative decision process was valid (Paras 21-24).

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a retired employee of Odisha Hydro Power Corporation, challenged the rejection of a pay scale increase which was initially favorably recommended by management but later dismissed (Paras 2-10).

Findings of Court:
The court concluded that the review petition failed to identify any significant errors in fact or law justifying review of the original judgment. The administrative decision-making related to pay scale adjustments was upheld (Paras 26-28).

Issues: The main issues encompassed whether the recommendation constituted a legal right and the appropriate standard for condoning delays in filing (Paras 14-15).

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that review jurisdiction is limited to correcting clear mistakes and cannot be utilized to reconsider issues already adjudicated. Disputes over merit cannot justify a review (Paras 18-20).

Result: Review petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. timeline of employment and pay scale revisions. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
2. petitioner's substantive arguments against the prior judgment. (Para 14 , 15)
3. scope and limitations of review jurisdiction. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27)
4. review petition dismissed. (Para 28 , 29)

JUDGMENT :

S.K. Panigrahi, J.

1. The present Review Petition has been filed seeking review of the order dated 08.05.2024 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.22869 of 2016, which was subsequently modified by order dated 16.08.2024.

I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE

2. The Petitioner (herein Opposite Party No.1) was an employee of Odisha Hydro Power Corporation Ltd. and retired on 31.08.2003 on attaining the age of superannuation while working as Fitter Mechanic, Grade-II.

3. He was initially appointed as Fitter Mechanic, Grade-III on 01.03.1982 under the work charged establishment in the scale of pay of Rs.240- 315/- per month. Subsequently, he was allowed to draw the scale of pay of Rs.300-410/- per month vide memo dated 30.08.1982 in accordance with the Finance Department order dated 15.04.1976.

4. On 26.02.1986, he was promoted to the post of Fitter-cum-Mechanic, Grade-II in the scale of pay of Rs.370-630/- per month.

5. The Irrigation and Power Department, vide letter dated 06.01.1987, revised the scale of pay of employees with effect from 01.01.1985. The scale of pay of Fitter Mechanic, Grade-III was revised from Rs.300/- to Rs.840/- per month and that of Fitter Mechanic, Grade-II from Rs.370/- to Rs.935/- per month. Thereafter, by Resolution dated 27.07.1991, the scale of pay of Fitter Mechanic, Grade-II was revised from Rs.935/- to Rs.1350/- per month with effect from 01.05.1989. Subsequently, by notification dated 18.01.1992, the scale of pay of Fitter Mechanic, Grade-II was revised to Rs.975-1660/- with effect from 01.05.1989.

6. At the relevant time, the employees of Energy and Irrigation Departments were under the common Irrigation and Power Department. In the year 1990, the two Departments were separated. The Petitioner, being under the Energy Department, continued in the pay scale of Rs.840-1240/- while employees in the Irrigation Department were in the higher scale of Rs.935-1530/- per month with effect from 01.01.1985.

7. The Petitioner submitted representations seeking grant of the higher scale of pay. He approached the Odisha Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, in O.A. No.58(C) of 1995, which was disposed of on 07.03.1996 granting liberty to file a fresh representation.

8. Thereafter, he filed O.J.C. No.562 of 1997 before this Court seeking direction for grant of revised scale of pay. During pendency of the said Writ Petition, Opposite Party No.5 recommended his case vide letter dated 30.03.2002 to the Director (HRD), Orissa Hydro Power Corporation Ltd., Bhubaneswar, to consider grant of scale of pay of Rs.4400-7905/- with effect from 01.04.1997 as a special case.

9. O.J.C. No.562 of 1997 was disposed of on 07.08.2015 with a direction to the Director (HRD) to consider the case of the Petitioner pursuant to the recommendation dated 30.03.2002 within three months.

10. In compliance thereof, Opposite Party No.5 passed the impugned order dated 23.11.2015 rejecting the claim of the Petitioner on the ground that the rationalized scale of pay of Rs.3600-6550/- extended to him was justified.

11. The Petitioner thereafter filed the present Writ Petition challenging the order dated 23.11.2015.

12. Upon consideration of the materials on record, including the earlier order dated 07.08.2015 and the recommendation dated 30.03.2002, this Court, by judgment dated 08.05.2024, quashed the impugned order dated 23.11.2015 and directed the Opposite Parties to grant the scale of pay of Rs.4400-7905/- with effect from 01.04.1997 in favour of the Petitioner within the stipulated period.

13. Thereafter, the Review Petition has been filed seeking review of the aforesaid judgment and order.

II. SUBMISS

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 Back to top