IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.1907 of 2026 Bhramarbar Das …. Petitioner Mr. M.C. Mishra, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. …. Opposite Parties Mr. P.P. Behera, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER 30.01.2026 04. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties. 3. Pursuant to the order dtd.22.01.2026, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner produced copy of the letter dtd.25.10.2023 so issued by the Government in the Department of Commerce & Transport. 4. Basing on the said communication, it is contended that it is the Sub-Collector who is the Claims Enquiry Officer before whom, the claim application is required to be made and the Sub-Collector has to take a decision on the same. Stipulation contained in communication dtd.25.10.2023 reads as follows:- “The Scheme provides for settlement of claims in a time- bound manner. The Claims Enquiry Officer i.e. the Sub- Divisional officer is required to convey his/her decision within one month of receipt of claim, after which the Claims Settlement Officer i.e. the Collector & DM is provided with 15 days to sanction the claims and forward the sanction order to General Insurance (GI) Council with intimation to the concerned Motor Accident Claim Tribunal and Transport Commissioner. Subsequently, the transfer of compensation amount to the claimant is to be processed within a period of 15 days by GI Council.” 4.1. It is contended that Petitioner though has made a detailed application before Opposite Party No.3, but no decision is being taken on the same. 4.2. It is accordingly contended that Opposite Party No.3 be directed to take a decision on the claim made by the Petitioner under Annexure-3-Series. 5. Learned Addl. Standing Counsel on the other hand raised objection contending inter alia that since no document is enclosed to the Writ Petition showing status of the Petitioner and whether the deceased was having any other legal heirs, no direction be issued as prayed for. 6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made, this Court while disposing the Writ Petition directs Opposite Party No.3 to take a lawful decision on the claim made by the Petitioner under Annexure-3-Series as expeditiously as possible and in terms of the communication issued by the Government on 25.10.2023. However, prior to taking any such decision, Opposite Party No.3 is directed to enquire as to whether the deceased was having any other legal heir and after such verification with due enquiry, appropriate action be taken. 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Subrat