Disposed

Susanta Kumar Nayak v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC10 Sept 2026WP(C)/29063/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ Petition filed seeking continuation under old pension rules and GPF instead of new NPS scheme. Court granted liberty to submit detailed representation within 3 weeks. Respondent to decide within 3 months if representation filed. Petition disposed upon specific directions for filing annexures.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to submit detailed representation within 3 weeks; Respondent to decide within 3 months upon receipt.

Susanta Kumar Nayak Vs State of Odisha — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Orissa HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.29063 of 2026 CNR No. ODHC010665952026

¶2

Susant Kumar Nayak

…. Petitioner

Mr. K.C Sahu, Adv.

-versus-

State of Odisha and Opp. Parties Others Mr. S.P Das, ASC

¶7

…. CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

¶8

ORDER

¶9

Order

¶10

10.09.2026 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid

¶11

¶12

Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode.

¶13

2. Heard learned counsel for the Parties.

¶14

3 . Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition with the following prayer:-

¶15

“It is therefore prayed that the Hon'ble Court be pleased to allow the writ petition by directing the 0pp. Parties that the petitioner is to be governed under the old O.C.S. (Pension) Rules 1992 and existing GPF (O) Rules, but not under the new restructured defined new pension scheme i.e. NPS with further directing the 0pp. Parties to open the GPF account by making subscription in his GPF account regularly in favour of the petitioner with all consequential service benefits so also treating his service under the old OCS(Pension) Rules 1992 by taking into account his initial date of appointment keeping in view of order/judgment(s) under Annexure-6, 7 & 8(Series) so also Annexure-9 for the interest of justice.

¶16

And may pass any other Writ(s), Direction(s), Order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may be deemed fit and proper;

¶17

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

¶18

// 2 //

¶19

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

¶20

5. It is observed that if such a representation is filed within the aforesaid 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 the Opp. Party No.2 be communicated to the petitioner.

¶21

6. Since, it is contended that similar claim after being allowed by the tribunal, confirmed by this Court and by the Apex Court vide orders available under Annexures-6 to 8(series) has been implemented vide order at Annexure-9, relevancy and effects of the orders available under Annexures6 to 8(series) and so also the implementation made vide order under Annexure-9 be taken into consideration, if it is applicable to the Petitioner claim. Petitioner is directed to provide copies of the orders passed under Annexures-6 to 8(series) and so also the order implementing the same under Annexure-9, before O.P. No.2 compliance

¶22

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

¶23

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge

¶24

Nitu Prava

¶25

Signature Not Verified

¶26

Digitally Signed Signed by: NITU PRAVA PRUSTY Reason: Authentication Location: OHC, Cuttack Date: 11-Sep-2026 16:13:09

¶27

Page 2 of 2

Susanta Kumar Nayak v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Susanta Kumar Nayak 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