Chandrakanti Sethy v. State Of Odisha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.C. (OAC) No.3937 of 2016 Chandrakanti Sethy ....
Petitioner Mr. Achyutananda Patnaik, Advocate along with Mr. S.K. Gadtia, Advocate -versusState of Odisha and Others ....
Opposite Parties Mr. M.K. Khuntia, AGA
CORAM:
JUSTICE M.S. RAMAN Order No.
ORDER
16.08.2022 01.
1.
This matter is taken up through virtual/physical mode. 2.
The Original Application No.3268 of 2016 (C) was filed before the Odisha Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack. After its abolition, the same has been transferred to this Court which is renumbered as WPC (OAC) No.3268 of 2016.
3.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. 4.
The petitioner has come up in the Writ Petition challenging the order No. 18448/H dated 01.09.2016 of Government of Odisha in Health and Family Welfare Department vide Annexure-3, whereby it was directed to the authority concerned to recover the excess payment made to the petitioner in Revised Assured Career Progression Scheme (RACPS) from 01.01.2013 to 30.06.2015. It is alleged that such recovery has been sought to be made without granting opportunity of hearing to the employees concerned. 5.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in identical case this Court has passed an order dated 11.08.2022
// 2 // bearing WPC(OAC) No.3289 of 2016 in the case of Baikuntha Senapati Vs. State of Odisha and Others. Paragraphs 4 & 5 of said order is extracted herein below for ready reference:
xxx xxx xxxx xxxx "4.
Learned Counsel for the Petitioner contended that the claim of the petitioner is covered by the judgment of the apex Court in the case of State of Punjab and Others V Rafiq Masih (White Washer), AIR 2015 SC 696 and as such, the Opposite Parties may be directed to consider the claim of the Petitioner in terms of the ratio decided in the case of State of Punjab and Others v Rafiq Masih (White Washer), AIR 2015 SC 696.
5.
In view of the above, the Writ Petition stands disposed of directing the Opposite Parties to consider the case of the Petitioner in terms of the ratio decided in the case of State of Punjab and Others v Rafiq Masih (White Washer), AIR 2015 SC 696 and take a decision within a period of three months from the date of communication of the order." 6.
Mr. M.K. Khuntia, learned Additional Government Advocate has no objection.
7.
In view of such conceding position, the present Writ Petition is disposed of in the light of the decision as cited at the bar.
(M.S. Raman) Judge Basudev