Dismissed¶¶14

Deolal Pandey v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC10 Oct 2025WP(C)/23778/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Pension/terminal benefits of convicted retired employee; non-sanctioning of pension despite retirement in 2012; conviction under Section 304 Part-I IPC 1860; appeal pending before Division Bench does not suspend conviction or sentence unless specifically ordered; Navjot Singh Sidhu v. State of Punjab (2007) 2 SCC 574 relied on; petition rejected/dismissed; liberty to revive claim upon success in criminal appeal; Orissa High Court, Cuttack; WP(C) No.23778 of 2025; Justice Dixit Krishna Shripad; decided 10.10.2025.

What did the court decide?

No relief granted; liberty reserved to the petitioner to revive his claim for release of pension in the event he emerges victorious in the criminal appeal, unblemished. ¶¶14

Deolal Pandey Vs State of Odisha — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Orissa HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

WP(C) No.23778 of 2025

¶3

Deolal Pandey …. Petitioner Represented by Adv.Mr. K.K. Dash, Adv. -versus- State of Odisha and …. Opposite Parties others Represented by Adv.Mr. S.B. Mohanty, AGA

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

JUSTICE DIXIT KRISHNA SHRIPAD

ORDER

10.10.2025

Order No. 01.

The short grievance of the petitioner is as to non-sanctioning of pension despite his retirement way back in the year, 2012.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner, in all fairness, submits that his client suffered an order of conviction and sentence for offence, inter alia, punishable under Section 304 Part-I of Indian Penal Code 1860 and that presently his appeal against the same is pending before the Division Bench of this Court. Further, he submits that since appeal is continuation of the original proceeding, the terminal benefits of the convict cannot be withheld.

¶11

Learned AGA Mr. Mohanty appearing for the OPs presses in to service an Apex Court decision in Navjot Singh Sidhu v. State of Punjab, (2007) 2 SCC 574 to contend that merely because an appeal is filed against conviction and sentence, there is no suspension of the same unless specifically ordered and therefore, no relief can be granted to the

¶12

Page 1 of 2

¶13

petitioner, who is a convicted criminal as on this day, notwithstanding, pendency of the appeal. There is force in this submission.

¶14

In the above circumstances, petition is liable to be rejected and accordingly it is, reserving liberty to the petitioner to revive his claim for release of the pension in the event he emerges victorious in the criminal appeal, unblemished.

¶15

Web copy of order to be acted upon by all concerned.

¶16

(Dixit Krishna Shripad) Judge

¶17

Prasant

¶18

Signature Not Verified

¶19

Digitally Signed Signed by: PRASANT KUMAR SAHOO Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 11-Oct-2025 13:44:54

¶20

Page 2 of 2

Deolal Pandey v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deolal Pandey v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kashinath Mahapatra Vs State of Odisha

Reena Naik Vs State of Odisha

Ramakanta Samantaray Vs State of Odisha

Sudhir Kumar Lenka Vs State of Odisha

Mamata Mani Biswal @ Mamata Rani Biswal Vs State of Odisha

Radheshyam Mishra Vs the Union of India