ORDER
N. Prusty, J.
1. The petitioner is presently working as Lecturer in Geology in Adikabi Saraladas College, Tirtol in the district of Jagatsinghpur. It is submitted that his service has been approved and he is receiving his salary regularly. But unfortunately his arrear salary for the period from June 1986 to November 1987 and arrear differential Salary from December 1987 to September 1993 have not been disbursed thereby causing great prejudice to him.
2. Heard. Mr. Mohanty, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Mishra, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
3. As it appears in this writ petition, the petitioner has claimed his arrear salary for the years 1986 to 1987 and 1987 to 1993. As such in the meantime about 21 years have passed from the date of his initial claim of 1986 and 14 years have passed from the date of his final claim of 1993. Law is well settled that even though there is no prescribed period of limitation for filing a writ petition, but the same should be filed within a reasonable period, which will vary from a minimum period of three months to a maximum period of one year from the date of cause of action, if it is for service benefit and a period of three years, if it is a claim for salary/pensionary benefits etc. and not beyond that.
4. The approval order dated 13.01.1998 under Annexure-1 indicates that it is in favour of one Siben Kumar Mitra. Approval order dated 12.05.1988 under Anhexure-2 is in favour of Siben Mitra. The approval order dated 23.09.1999 which is a part of Annexure-2 is in the name of Siben Kumar Mitra and Annexure-3, which is the pay fixation statement is in the name of Siben Mitra. As such, there is discrepancy in the name of the petitioner in all the above approval orders etc.
Since this is a years old claim of the petitioner beginning from 1986 to 1993 and there is discrepancy in the name of the petitioner in the approval orders etc., I am not inclined to pass any order with regard to the claim of the petitioner.
5. However, if so advised, the petitioner is at liberty to approach the departmental authority/opposite parties for redressal of his grievance in accordance with law by way of filing a detailed representation highlighting all his grievances, enclosing documents in support of his contention. In case such a representation is filed, the opposite parties shall do well to consider and dispose of the said representation on its own merit, in accordance with law, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of such representation and communicate their decision to the petitioner within a period of two weeks thereafter. If the decision goes in favour of the petitioner, the benefit of such decision be extended in favour the petitioner within a period of eight months from the date of such decision.
6. It is made clear that I have not gone into nor observed anything with regard to the merits of the claim of the petitioner. On receipt of the representation, if any, the opposite parties shall take their independent decision in the matter on its own merit, in accordance with law, keeping view the Rules and Circulars with regard to the claim of the petitioner as well as settled principle of law with regard to entertaining a claim has been made by the petitioner.
7. With the aforesaid observation/direction the writ petition is disposed of.
Requisites for communication of the order to the opposite parties alongwith a copy of the writ petition be filed within one week.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.