Disposed

Satyananda Panda v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC11 Sept 2026WP(C)/28855/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought revision of pay and pension under ORSP Rules, 2017. The High Court did not decide the merits but granted liberty to file a fresh representation to the Accountant General within three weeks, directing the authority to decide within three months thereafter, utilizing a hybrid mode hearing.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to file fresh representation before Accountant General within three weeks; direction to respondent to decide within three months.

Satyananda Panda Vs State of Odisha — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Orissa HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 28855 of 2026 CNR No.ODHC010670762026

¶2

Satyananda Panda ..... Petitioner Mr. S.K. Das, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Mr. P.K. Sahoo, ASC Mr. S.K. Patra, Adv. (for Accountant General)

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER

¶5

11.09.2026

¶6

Order No. 01

¶7

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for Petitioner and learned counsel for the State-Opposite Parties.

¶9

3. Petitioner has filed the present writ petition inter alia with the following prayer:-

¶10

“Under the above circumstances, it is therefore humbly prayed that the Hon’ble Court may be graciously pleased to direct the Opp. Parties to revise the pay of the petitioner in the pay level-9 of the pay matrix under ORSP Rules, 2017 as he was in receipt of the grade pay of Rs.4200/- in the 3^rd RACP as it evident from the Government order dated 27.04.2026;

¶11

And further the Hon’ble Court be pleased to direct the Opp. Parties to refix the pay and pension of the petitioner in the enhance rate in the pay Level-9 under ORSP Rules, 2017 and to grant him the differential arrears, within a stipulated period as deem fit and proper;

¶12

Page 1 of 2.

¶13

And/or pass any other appropriate writ/writs, order/orders and direction/directions in the fitness of the case;

¶14

And for this act of kindness as in duty bound the petitioner shall ever pray.”

¶15

However, taking into account the claim raised in the present Writ Petition, liberty is granted to the Petitioner to make a fresh representation before Opp. Party No.2 by enclosing all the relevant documents and citations in support of her claim, if any, within a period of three (3) weeks hence.

¶16

It is observed that if such representation is filed within the aforesaid time period, Opp. Party No.2 shall do well to take a lawful decision on the same within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of such representation. The order so passed by Opp. Party No. 2 be communicated to the Petitioner.

¶17

With the aforesaid observation and direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶18

(BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge

¶19

Jyoti

¶20

Signature Not Verified

¶21

Digitally Signed Signed by: JYOTIPRAVA BHOL Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORI SSA Date: 11-Sep-2026 15:13:48

¶22

Page 2 of 2.

Satyananda Panda v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satyananda Panda v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases