IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.22484 of 2020 Prahallad Swain …. Petitioner Mr. A. Mishra, Advocate -versus- Union of India and Others …. Opposite Parties Mr. P.K. Parhi, DSGI Mr. D. Nayak, Advocate for O.P. Nos.2 and 3 CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER 08.07.2026 09. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. It is contended that even though petitioner’s father was allowed to take retirement on the ground of incapacitation in the year 2003 and there was provision to provide the appointment to the petitioner under Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme but the same was never considered till basing on the order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.128 of 2019, petitioner’s claim was rejected vide order dated 30.03.2020 under Annexure- 5. 3.1. It is contended that since on the face of his eligibility, the Corporation delayed the matter and only rejected the claim vide the impugned order dated 30.03.2020 under Annexure-5 and petitioner in the meantime has already attained the age of 52 years, petitioner be given liberty to make an appropriate application seeking compensation from the Opp. Party- Corporation for such delayed action on their part in considering and taking a decision. 4. Learned counsel appearing for O.P. Nos.2 and 3 on the other hand contended that petitioner’s claim has been rightly rejected and the post from which petitioner’s father was allowed to take retirement on the ground of incapacitation since is no more available, no illegality or irregularity can be found with such rejection. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the submission made, this Court while disposing the Writ Petition, is of the view that since petitioner has already attained the age of 52 years, no fruitful purpose will be solved, if any direction will be issued to re-consider the petitioner’s claim to get the benefit of appointment under Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme. Hence, it is open for the petitioner to make a claim for compensation before Opp. Party No.3. It is observed that if any such application will be moved before O.P. No.3 within a period of 3(three) weeks hence, Opp. Party No.3 shall take a lawful decision on the same within a period of 3(three) months from the date of receipt of such application with due communication to the petitioner. 6. The Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Basudev