LAWS(ORI)-2022-3-144

STATE OF ODISHA Vs. SUJATA RANI SAHU

Decided On March 17, 2022
State Of Odisha Appellant
V/S
Sujata Rani Sahu Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the writ petitions, having been filed impugning the common order dtd. 17/7/2017 passed by the Odisha Administrative Tribunal, Bhubaneswar in O.A. No.3039 of 2015 and O.A. No.416 of 2015 directing the State-petitioners to grant the corresponding scale of pay to opposite party no.1 in Pay Band-3 of Rs.15,600.00 39,100/- and fix up her pay accordingly with effect from 1/1/2013, as has been done in the case of Bidyut Kumar Sahoo, involve common questions of law and facts. Therefore, they are heard together and disposed of by this common judgment which will govern both the cases.

(2.) The petitioners and opposite parties in both writ petitions being same, for the sake of convenience as well as for just and proper adjudication, the factual matrix of W.P.(C) No.4486 of 2018, as recorded by the tribunal in the impugned judgment, is referred to in a nutshell.

(3.) Mr. B.P. Tripathy, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State-petitioners contended that the second financial upgradation was allowed to opp. party no.1 as per the Finance Department Resolution no.3560 dtd. 6/2/2013 read with 1st schedule of ORSP Rules, 2008. Accordingly, her pay was fixed at Rs.24,230.00 with grade pay of Rs.6600.00 w.e.f. 1/1/2013, vide order dtd. 11/9/2014. It is further contended that the claim of opposite party no.1 to fix her pay with the corresponding pay band of the higher grade pay, is not permissible in view of observation of the Government in Finance Department that as opposite party no.1 had completed 20 years of service as on 1/1/2013, her pay may be fixed allowing 3% increment in the scale of pay of Rs.9300.0034800/- in P.B.-2, instead of grade pay of Rs.6600.00. Thereby, the pay of opposite party no.1 was fixed at Rs.24,230.00 in P.B-2 with grade pay Rs.5400.00 w.e.f. 1/1/2013 and the order granting grade pay of Rs.6600.00 was withdrawn. Therefore, no illegality or irregularity has been committed by the authority in passing such order, so as to warrant interference of this Court.