STATE OF ORISSA REPRESENTED THROUGH ITS COMMISSIONER-CUM-SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FINANCE DEPARTMENT AND ANOTHER Vs. ORISSA KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES BOARD KARMACHARI SANGHA, REPRESENTED THROUGH ITS SECRETARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE State in this writ appeal assails the order of the learned Single Judge dated 25.10.2010 in W.P. (C) No.8438 of 2010, wherein the learned Single Judge while quashing Annexure -12 directed the State Government to amend the Orissa Khadi and Village Industries Board Regulation, 1960 in extending pensionary benefits to its employees and to complete the entire process within a period of three months from the date of communication of the said order.

(2.) THE Orissa Khadi and Village Industries Board Karmachari Sangha represented through its Secretary as petitioner had approached this Court by way of filing a writ petition which was registered as W.P.(C) No.8438 of 2010 for quashing the decision of the Government at (Annexure -17) expressing its inability in implementing the pension scheme for the Orissa Khadi and Village Industries Board employees which was communicated to the petitioner by the Additional Secretary to the Government in Industries Department in his letter no.18583 dated 14.12.2009. Further, the petitioner has prayed for directing the Opposite Party No.1 to make regulation under Section 36(2) of the Odisha Khadi and Village Industries Board Act, 1955 (Odisha Act 3 of 1956) in introducing the pension scheme as per the Resolution of the aforesaid Board dated 10.2.2009.

(3.) THE Odisha Khadi and Village Industries Board who was opposite party no. 3 in W.P(C) No.8438 of 2010, filed the counter affidavit wherein it is their stand that the Board Regulations are silent about the pension to be given to its employees. The Board also has no capacity of its own to provide pension to its employees without any financial support from the State Government. It is the further stand of the Board that the Board in the year 1984, 1994, 2008 and 2009 have adopted resolutions for amendment of Regulation -52 of the Regulation, 1960 and the opposite party no.1 i.e., the State Government was moved for extension of pensionary benefits to the employees of the Board. But the Government on the ground of financial stringency did not accept such proposal whenever it was sent to them.