B.R. Sarangi, J. - (1.)All the above writ petitions having similar cause of action, have been heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment. For better appreciation, the fact of W.P.(C) No. 1 1117/2015 has been taken into consideration for judgment of all the matters. The petitioner has filed this application seeking for the following reliefs:
(i) Direct the opposite party to confirm the petitioner by discontinuing the probation and declaring him confirmed with effect from 27.02.2006.

(ii) Direct the opposite party to disburse all financial and service benefits which are attached to the post to which the petitioner has been appointed w.e.f. 27.02.2004.

(iii) Direct the opposite party to disburse all financial and service benefits handed at Para 10 and Annexure -6 of this Writ Application w.e.f. 27.02.2004.

(2.)The petitioner was appointed as Data Entry Operator on 26.02.2004 pursuant to advertisement issued on 20.12.2002 vide Annexure -1 by following due procedure of selection by conducting written examination, interview and on proper verification of the certificates. The appointment order under Annexure -2 dated 02.04.2004 indicates that the petitioner was appointed in regular scale of pay of Rs. 3050 -75 -3950 -80 -4590 with usual D.A. and other allowances as admissible from time to time with effect from the date he joins in his post pursuant to which the petitioner joined the post and discharged his duty against the said post. The advertisement as well as the appointment order indicates that he is entitled to get usual service and financial benefits attached to the post as prescribed by rules and regulations. On the allegation of corruption in purchase of computers and illegal appointments made in the Odisha Legislative Assembly, the State Government appointed Hon'ble Justice C.R. Pal, retired Judge of Orissa High Court as Commission of inquiry under the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952 to enquire into the following matters and submit his report:
(i) The alleged violation of the Recruitment procedure and the illegal and unfair practice adopted in giving appointments and showing favouritism and nepotism by misuse of official position.

(ii) Alleged corruption committed in purchase of Computers for the Legislative Assembly

(iii) The role, if any, of any authority/organization/individual in causing violation of the procedure in making the above alleged appointment and purchase; and

(iv) Any other matter connected with or incidental thereto as the Commission may consider appropriate including any suggestions in relation to the above matters.

The appointment of Commission of Inquiry as challenged by the Speaker of the 12th Orissa Legislative Assembly in W.P.(G) No. 05/2007 and this Court vide judgment dated 30.09.2008 passed the following order:

"20. In view of the facts and circumstances mentioned above, this Court is of the opinion that since the State Government has no jurisdiction to take any action in the affairs of the State Legislative Assembly and in sub -section (4) of Sec. 3 of the Commission of inquiry Act, it has been provided that the report of the Commission is to be laid before the Legislature of the State together with the memorandum of action taken thereon which is not feasible to be complied with and also the affairs of the State Assembly or its Secretariat have not been enumerated in List II or List III of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution and the State Government has not been conferred with the residuary power as has been conferred to the Central Government under Entry 97 of List II, the appointment of the Commission under the Commissions of Inquiry Act in the instant case beyond the jurisdiction of the State Government. We do not mean here that if in the opinion of the Legislature, some wrong has been done, the same should not be enquired into.

21. In the result, the petition is allowed, the impugned notification dated 15th September, 2004 appointing the Commission with retrospective effect, i.e., with effect from 22nd July, 2004 is held illegal and is accordingly quashed.

However, we cannot debar the Legislature to take appropriate action in accordance with law. The Legislature has full jurisdiction to pass resolution and also entrust the enquiry or investigation to any one in their discretion in accordance with law.

There shall be no order as to costs."

The said judgment of this Court has been challenged by the State of Orissa before the Apex Court which was registered a PC No. 537/2009 converted into Civil Appeal No. 1986 of 2014 which is still pending for consideration. During the pendency of the aforesaid Civil Appeal before the Apex Court with regard to the legality and propriety of the appointment of Commission of Inquiry and his report, the petitioner has not been paid the financial benefit admissible to the post in terms of appointment under Annexure -2. Hence this application.

(3.)Mr. R.K. Rath, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner having been duly selected by proper recruitment process and there being no allegation of any kind against him and his appointment having been made against the sanctioned post, he is entitled to get all the consequential benefits in terms of his appointment under Annexure -2. Though in the meantime 11 years have elapsed, he has not been extended all the benefits attached to his post. It is urged that the petitioner is entitled to get the following service and financial benefits:
(i) Service book has not been opened till date.

(ii) Annual increment have not been given.

(iii) GPF account has not been created nor GPF amount as being deducted.

(iv) House Rent allowance have not been released,

(v) Benefits regards sanction of all types of leave has not been given.

(vi) The benefit of revised scale of pay has not been extended under the ORSP Rules, 2008.

(vii) No promotion has been given to the petitioner,

(viii) The benefit of revised Assured Career Progression (RACP) Scheme has also not been extended even though he has become eligible for it.

(ix) None of the increments attached to the post have been given to the petitioner.

(x) The benefit of upgradation since 2009 of scale of pay attached to the post of data entry operator has also not been given to the petitioner because of which persons junior to the petitioner and who have joined after the petitioner are getting higher scale of pay than the petitioner.

(xi) The petitioner has been deprived of promotional opportunities to the next post i.e. Assistant Programmer.

(xii) In fact the petitioner without any reason is being continued on probation basis.

Non -grant of such benefits have caused serious prejudice to the petitioner. It is further urged that on the plea of pendency of the Civil Appeal before the Apex Court which has been filed against the order passed by this Court, the benefits admissible to the petitioner have not been extended. It is urged that the pendency of the said Civil Appeal has no nexus with the benefits claimed by the petitioner in terms of his appointment order under Annexure -2. Non -extension of all the service and financial benefits attached to his post in terms of the order of appointment under Annexure -2 is arbitrary and unreasonable and violative of Article 14 the Constitution of India. It is further urged that similarly situated persons, who are juniors to the petitioner, have been extended all the service and financial benefits.