IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C ) NO.24941 of 2006 CNR No. ODHC010569952026 Akhaya Kumar Nayak …. Petitioner Mr. K.C. Sahu, Adv. -versus- State of Odisha & Others …. Opp. Parties Mr. A. Tripathy, AGA CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER 07.08.2026 1. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the Opp. Parties. 3. Petitioner has filed the present writ petition inter alia with the following prayer:- It is therefore prayed that the Hon'ble Court be pleased to allow the writ petition by directing the Opp. Parties that the petitioner is to be governed under the old O.C.S. (Pension) Rules 1992 and existing GPF (0) Rules, but not under the new restructured defined new pension scheme ie. NPS with further directing the Opp. Parties to open the GPF account by making subscription in his GPF account regularly in favour of the petitioner by converting to GPF from NPS with all consequential service benefits so also treating his service under the old OCS(Pension) Rules 1992 by taking into account his initial contractual date of appointment keeping in view of order/judgment(s) under Annexure-4, 5, 6(Series) & 7 for the interest of justice. And may pass any other Writ(s), Direction(s), Order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may be deemed fit and proper. And for this act of kindness, the petitioner shall as in duty bound ever pray; 4. 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 his claim, if any, within a period of three (3) weeks hence. 5. It is observed that if any 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. 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-4 to 6 has been implemented vide order at Annexure-7, relevancy and effects of the orders available under Annexures-4 to 6 and so also the implementation made vide order under Annexure-7 be taken into consideration, if it is applicable to the Petitioner claim. Petitioner is directed to provide copies of the orders passed under Annexures-4 to 6 and so also the order implementing the same under Annexure-7, before O.P. No.3 compliance. 7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge sangita