IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK RVWPET No.80 of 2025 CRPF, Employees Educational Society, New Delhi & Ors. …. Petitioners Mr. P.K. Parhi, DSGI along with Mr. D. Pattnayak, Sr. Panel Counsel -versus- Bhagaban Panda …. Opposite Parties Mr. M.K. Mishra, Sr. Advocate along with Mr. S. Senapati, Advocate CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER 17.04.2026 RVWPET No.80 of 2025 & I.A. No.68 of 2025 04. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties. 3. This I.A has been filed with a prayer to condone the delay in filing the Review Petition to the tune of 238 days. 4. It is contended that after disposal of the Writ Petition vide order dtd.21.05.2024 and after collection of all materials, it came to the knowledge of the authorities that such an order has been passed by this Court on 30.05.2024. Thereafter with due examination of the entire documents and discussion with the Departmental Officers, the Review Petition was prepared and filed on 10.02.2025. 4.1. It is accordingly contended that taking into account the stand taken in Para-2 of the I.A, the delay in filing of the Review Petition be condoned. 5. Basing on the objection filed by the Opposite Parties to the I.A, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Opposite Parties condoned that, since the order in question has been passed basing on the affidavit filed by the Review Petitioner and the submission made that arrear as due to the Petitioner so calculated and reflected under Annexure-C/5 to the affidavit, will be released, the Writ Petition was disposed of with a direction to release the amount so calculated and reflected in Annexure-C/5 to the affidavit. 5.1. It is accordingly contended that since the order in question has been passed basing on the consent given by the learned Senior Panel Counsel appearing in the Writ Petition, no Review is entertainable and accordingly the delay in filing the Review is not required to be condoned. 6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made, this Court finds that the present Review Petition has been filed seeking review of the order dtd.21.05.2024. As found from the said order, the Writ Petition was disposed of, basing on the affidavit filed by the learned Senior Panel Counsel appearing therein and the submission made that arrear calculated and reflected in Annexure-C/5 to the affidavit will be released in favour of the Writ Petitioners. Since the order dtd.21.05.2024 has been passed on concession and with the understanding that the arrear as due and admissible and so calculated and reflected in Annexure-C/5 to the affidavit will be released in favour of the Opp. Parties, it is the view of this that no review of the order is entertainable. 6.1. Not only that this Court finds no justifiable ground being taken to condone the delay to the tune of 238 days and the explanation given in Para-2 of the I.A is not sufficient to condone the delay. 7. Accordingly, this Court is not inclined to condone the delay in filing of the Review Petition and dismiss the I.A. Consequentially the Review Petition also fails and stands dismissed. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Subrat Judge