Orissa High Court
Sudarshan Kar vs Union Of India And Others ....... Opp. ... on 14 July, 2025
Author: S.K. Sahoo
Bench: S.K. Sahoo
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.26694 of 2024
An application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of
India
-------------------------
Sudarshan Kar ....... Petitioner
-Versus-
Union of India and others ....... Opp. Parties
For Petitioner: - Mr. Trilochan Rath,
Advocate
For Opp. Parties: - Mr. P. K. Parhi, DSGI
along with Ms. S. Patra, CGC
-------------------------
P R E S E N T:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------
Date of Hearing: 09.07.2025 Date of Order: 14.07.2025
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
S. S. Mishra, J: Sudarshan Kar has preferred the writ petition
assailing the order dated 29.04.2024 passed by the
learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench,
Page 1 of 8
Cuttack (for short "the Tribunal") in M.A. No.187 of
2024 arising out of O.A. No.575 of 2018, whereby the
application moved by him seeking amendment to the
original application has been turned down.
The writ petitioner filed Original Application
inter alia making the following prayer before the
learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench,
Cuttack, which reads as under:-
"a) Quash the part of the order in which
the period of suspension has been treated
as no work no pay for all purposes vide
Annexure-A/5 and also the order under
Annexure-A/12, where the Superintendent
of Post has requested CPMG, Odisha Circle
to review and treat the period of
suspension as duty for the purpose of
pensionary benefits.
b) Issue mandate requiring the opposite
parties/respondents treat the period of
suspension till reinstatement as duty for all
purposes and pay the arrear TRCA as
entitled under law and revise the current
TRCA according with immediate effect.
c) And pass any order/orders,
direction/directions as deemed fit and
proper in the interest of justice and fair
play."
Page 2 of 8
While the O.A. was being heard, the
representation given by the writ petitioner to the Chief
Postmaster General, Odisha Circle, Bhubaneswar was
turned down vide order dated 30.04.2019 on the
grounds as reflecting in the Office Order dated
30.04.2019. For the sake of convenience, the operating
part of the said order reproduced herein:-
"However taking all the facts into
consideration and the punishment order
vide SSPOs, Puri Division Memo No.F/Misc-
6/2006 dated 26.08.2014 and in the same
order it was further ordered that the period
of put off duty should be treated as no work
no pay for all purposes and the TRCA paid
to him so far during the period of put off
duty should be limited to ex-gratia paid to
him till the date of his reinstatement, I do
not find any merit in this case and
accordingly I considered and rejected the
representation dated 17.05.2017 of Sri
Kar."
Since the issue regarding payment TRCA is
one of the issues in lis pending before the learned
Tribunal in O.A. in subject, the writ petitioner also
wanted to challenge the Office order dated 30.04.2019.
However, copy of the said order dated 30.04.2019 was
Page 3 of 8
not made available to him. In one of the hearing before
the learned Tribunal on 21.02.2024, the opposite
parties-Union of India produced the said Office order
before the learned Tribunal. The learned Tribunal in the
order dated 21.02.2024 recorded as under:-
"Heard both sides.
Learned counsel for the respondents
produces an order dated 30.04.2019 by
which representation of the applicant has
been disposed of.
Learned counsel for the applicant
submitted that the respondents have
today produced the said letter which was
not filed along with the counter or reply to
rejoinder filed earlier. He submitted that
the said order needs to be challenged for
better adjudication of the case.
Respondents to file the said documents in
shape of affidavit after serving copy on
other side.
Applicant if so advised may file MA for
amendment.
The matter is released from part heard.
List on 11.03.2024 under orders."
Pursuant to the aforementioned direction, the
opposite parties filed an affidavit dated 06.03.2024 and
brought on record the aforementioned order dated
Page 4 of 8
30.04.2019. Paragraph-1 of the affidavit filed on behalf
of the opposite parties is relevant, which reads thus:-
"1. That, the above case was listed on
21.02.2024 for part heard. During the
hearing of the respondents side, the
counsel for the respondents submitted
the memo no. DC/69-03/2019 dtd.
30.04.2019 for appraisal and better
adjudication of the case. Wherein the
CPMG, Odisha Circle, Bhubaneswar has
been pleased to reject the representation
dtd.17.05.2017 of the applicant for
allowing him the full allowance for the
period of put off duty."
Reading of the order dated 21.02.2024 and
paragraph-1 of the affidavit dated 06.03.2024, makes it
abundantly clear that the issue of claim of TRCA by the
writ petitioner has been sub-judice before the learned
Tribunal. Confronted with such situation, the writ
petitioner moved M.A. No.187 of 2024 seeking
amendment to the O.A. so as to challenge the order
dated 30.04.2019 passed by the Chief Postmaster
General, Odisha Circle, Bhubaneswar.
The application is annexed as Annexure-6 to
the writ petition. For the sake of brevity the contents of
Page 5 of 8
the application are not reiterated herein but suffice it to
say that through the application, the writ petitioner
wanted to assail the order dated 30.04.2019 passed by
the Chief Postmaster General, Odisha Circle,
Bhubaneswar. The said application for amendment has
been turned down by the learned Tribunal in the
impugned order primarily on two grounds that the
matter (O.A.) has already been part heard and
secondly, that the Rule 17(6) of CAT (Procedure) Rules,
1987 does not permit the parties to amend the
pleadings in the same manner as provided under Order
6, Rule 17 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Mr. Trilochan Rath, learned counsel appearing
for the petitioner and Mr. P.K. Parhi, learned DSGI for
Union of India has been heard in extenso.
We have perused the entire record placed
before us. We are of the considered view that by the
prayer No.(b) before the Tribunal in O.A., the petitioner
has already claimed the arrears of TRCA. Vide order
Page 6 of 8
dated 30.04.2019, the Chief Postmaster General,
Odisha Circle, Bhubaneswar has rejected the claim of
TRCA. Therefore, the petitioner is rightly aggrieved by
the said order. The issue being sub-judice before the
learned Tribunal, he has moved appropriate application
for amendment which ought to have been allowed.
However, the learned Tribunal on hyper-technical
grounds have rejected the same by the impugned order
dated 29.04.2024 which is not tenable under law.
Hence, we are inclined to set aside the impugned order
dated 29.04.2024 passed by the learned Central
Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack in M.A.
No.187 of 2024 arising out of O.A. No.575 of 2018 and
direct the learned Tribunal to consider the M.A. No.187
of 2024 on merits and pass appropriate order and
consolidately decide the entire issue in lis before it as
has been raised by the petitioner.
Page 7 of 8
With this observation, the writ petition is
allowed and disposed of.
..........................
S.S. Mishra, J.
S.K. Sahoo, J. I agree.
................................ S. K. Sahoo, J.
Orissa High Court, Cuttack The 14th July, 2025/ Swarna Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SWARNAPRAVA DASH Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 14-Jul-2025 17:31:48 Page 8 of 8