Page 1 of 1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK FAO No.382 of 2018 The State of Odisha and another ..... Appellant Represented by Adv. – Smt. Sasmita Nayak, ASC -versus- Dillip Kumar Sahu and another ..... Respondents Represented by Adv. – Mr. Amit Kumar Saa, Advocate for Respondent No.1 Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sahoo, Advocate for O.P. No.2 CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 31.03.2026 Order No. 05. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. It is contended by the learned counsel appearing for the parties that the issue involved in the present case is covered by the judgment of this Court so passed on 19.03.2025 in FAO No.509 of 2014 and batch. 4. In view of such submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the present FAO is disposed of with liberty to the learned counsel for the State to seek for variation/modification of the order in the event it is found that Page 2 of 2. the aforesaid submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the Opposite Parties is wrong. (Aditya Kumar Mohapatra) Judge Debasis `