SANOJ PODH Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, who is at present working as a Junior Stenographer in the judgeship of Sambalpur, questioning the correctness of the rejection of his representation dated 29.4.2010 by the O.P. No. 2 communicated to the petitioner by the O.P. No. 3 vide order dated 1.7.2011 (Annexure-14) with regard to grant of protection of his pay as well as past service rendered in his previous place of posting i.e. in the judgeship of Ganjam-Berhampur.

(2.) Dr. Sarangi, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner served more than a year in the judgeship of Ganjam, Berhampur and got one increment in his scale of pay. As per the requirement he has submitted his application for the post of Jr. Stenographer in the judgeship of Sambalpur through proper channel and after issuance of appointment order by the District Judge, Sambalpur he has been duly relieved from the judgeship of Ganjam and joined in the judgeship of Samblapur. Further, the District Judge, Ganjam has also sent his Service Book, LPC indicating the last pay drawn at his old station and GIS information to the District Judge, Sambalpur. However, the O.P. Nos. 2 and 3 without applying their mind in proper perspective rejected the representation of the petitioner without granting the benefit as prayed, which is violative of the principles of service jurisprudence. It is also submitted that petitioner may not claim or get the seniority, but his protection of pay and service rendered in the judgeship of Ganjam cannot be taken away for his future service benefits. Therefore, it is prayed that the petitioner may be granted the benefits as prayed for in this writ petition.

(3.) On the other hand Mr. Mohapatra, learned Government Advocate, placing reliance upon the counter filed by the opposite parties, particularly the averments made at paragraph 7 of the counter, submits that the representation of the petitioner has been rejected by the District Judge, Sambalpur on proper application of mind and as per the Government of Odisha, Finance Department Office Memorandum No. 31504/F dated 16.6.1980. It is submitted that if the petitioner could have resigned from his earlier post in the judgeship of Ganjam and joined in the judgeship of Sambalpur, his pay could have been protected. But the petitioner has been relieved from the judgeship of Ganjam and has joined in the judgeship of Sambalpur, therefore he cannot be granted the relief as prayed for. Hence, learned Govt. Advocate prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.