Janardan Mishra Vs State of Odisha

3. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia challenging the impugned communication dtd.10.10.2023 so issued by Opposite Party No.4 under Annexure-6. Vide the impugned communication, pension papers of the Petitioner was returned back with a request to re-submit the same, after due revision of the pay as per the entitlement of the Petitioner under RACP and adjustment of the excess payment from the DCRG benefit of the Petitioner.

¶15

4. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that such a letter could not have been issued in view of the nature of order passed by the Tribunal in O.A. No.1247 of 2018 and batch under Annexure-3, confirmed by this Court in its order under Annexure-4 as well as by the Apex Court in its order under Annexure-5.

¶16

// 2 //

¶17

4.1. It is accordingly contended that in view of the nature of order passed by the Tribunal under Annexure-3, confirmed by this Court under Annexure-4 and by the Hon’ble Apex Court under Annexure-5, the ground on which Petitioner’s pension papers were returned back by Opposite Party No.4 vide Annexure-6 is not sustainable in the eye of law.

¶18

5. Mr. P.K. Panda, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State on the other hand while supporting the impugned communication made his submission. But it is fairly contended that, if the contention of the Petitioner that in view of the order passed under Annexure-3, confirmed vide orders under Annexures-4 and 5, no such revision is required to be made, let Opposite Party No.5 be directed to take a decision on the request available under Annexure-6.

¶19

5.1. It is further contended that since no action has been taken basing on Annexure-6, Petitioner has got no cause of action.

¶20

6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made, this Court while disposing the Writ Petition directs the Opposite Party No.5 to take consequential action on the request made under Annexre-6. However, Opposite Party No.5 is directed to give an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner prior to submission of the pension papers after due revision if any. Opposite Party No.5 is also directed to take into consideration the orders relied on by the Petitioner in

¶21

Page 2 of 3

¶22

// 3 //

¶23

support of his claim. Petitioner is directed to provide a copy of this order along with the orders passed by the Tribunal under Annexure-3, further confirmed by this Court under Annexure-4 and by the Hon’ble Apex Court under Annexure-5 before Opposite Party No.5 within a period of ten (10) days from today. Opposite Party No.5 is directed to take a lawful decision on the request available under Annexure-6 within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of the order from the Petitioner along with the orders passed under Annexures-3 to 5.

¶24

7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

¶25

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge

¶26

Subrat

¶27

Signature Not Verified

¶28

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBRAT KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CU TTACK Date: 17-Nov-2025 10:52:28

¶29

Page 3 of 3