The court ruled that all similarly situated employees must be treated alike regarding benefits, and differing treatment based on pending inquiries violates constitutional equality provisions.

JUDGMENT :

BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY, J.

1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode.

2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

3. Since all these Writ Petitions have been filed inter alia with a prayer to direct the State-Opp. parties to release the unutilized leave salary on the face of pendency of the Departmental Proceeding/Criminal Proceeding, all the Writ Petitions were heard analogously and disposed of by the present common order.

4. Considering the claim and the submission that on the face of the pendency of departmental and/or Criminal or Vigilance Proceeding, similarly situated employees have been released with the benefit of unutilized salary on their retirement from service, this Court passed the following order on 18.12.2025:

“1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode.

2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties.

3. It is contended that on similar issue where the proceeding is pending benefit of unutilized leave salary has been released vide order dtd.03.07.2023. But on the ground of pendency of the proceeding against the Petitioner, the same benefit is not being extended.

4. Considering the submissions made, this Court directs learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State to obtain instruction as to whether benefit under Annexure-5 has been extended even though proceeding is pending against the person concerned.

5. As requested, list this matter in the week commencing 19th January, 2026. Free copy of this order be handed over to learned AGA for compliance.”

5. Pursuant to such order passed, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate produced the instruction so provided by the Department of Water Resources vide letter dt.16.01.2026.

5.1. Basing on the instruction, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate contended that, though it is not disputed that in some cases, on the face of pendency of Criminal Proceeding/Departmental Proceeding, the State authorities are releasing the unutilized leave salary in favour of the concerned employee on their retirement from service, but in some cases, taking into account the gravity of the charges and mis-appropriation amount involved, such prayer is being negatived.

5.2. It is accordingly contended that since in some of the cases the misappropriation amount is very high, and the changes are serious, the Departments of the State are not releasing the unutilized leave salary. It is accordingly contended that no direction be issued, as prayed for, in the present batch of Writ Petitions, so far as release of unutilized leave salary is concerned, during pendency of Criminal/Departmental Proceeding.

6. Mr. R.N. Parija, learned counsel appearing in W.P.(C ) No.36169 of 2025 produced copy of 2(two) orders showing release of such unutilized leave salary, on the face of pendency of Disciplinary Proceeding/Criminal Proceeding, pursuant to the order passed by this Court in different Writ Petitions. (Copies of those orders produced in Court be kept on record).

7. Learned counsels appearing for the Petitioners contended that by taking unutilized leave salary as a retiral benefits, various departments of the State while in some cases are releasing the benefit of unutilized leave salary, but in some cases, they are taking a different view and not releasing the benefit only on the ground of pendency of Departmental and/or Criminal/Vigilance Proceeding.

7.1. It is contended that if pendency of a Departmental and/or Criminal/Vigilance Proceeding is a bar for such release of unutilized leave salary, gravity of the charges and/or misappropriation of high amount cannot be the basis for releasing and/or withholding the benefit and a uniform policy is required to