Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.21200 of 2025 Chaitanya Behera ..... Petitioner Mr. P.R. Barik, Advocate -versus- The Banking Ombudsman of Odisha, BBSR & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER 31.03.2026 Order No.04 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard Mr. P.R. Barik, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner. In spite of notice being sent by Special Messenger with due appearance of Opp. Party No. 4, nobody is there when the matter was taken up, nor any representation was made when the matter was heard by this Court on 17.03.2026. 3. The present writ petition has been filed inter alia challenging order dtd.22.07.2024 so passed by Opp. Party No. 3 under Annexure-9. Vide the said order it was intimated to the Petitioner that complaint made by the Petitioner has been duly forwarded to Opp. Party No. 4-Bank and if Petitioner does not receive any response from the Bank within 30 days from the date of its communication, Petitioner can make a complaint to the RBI Ombudsman. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that Petitioner cleared the loan so taken by him from the Opp. Party- Bank under Rinn Samadhan 2021-22 on 01.02.022 and NDC was Page 2 of 3. issued in his favour by the Bank on 16.02.2022 under Annexure-1. Even though NDC was issued on 16.02.2022, the documents so pledged by the Petitioner while availing the loan were never returned to the Petitioner till the same was provided to the Petitioner on 17.07.2024, basing on the application made by the Petitioner under Annexure-3. 4.1. Relying on the provisions contained in the circular issued by the RBI on 13.09.2023 under Annexure-2, more particularly Para 6 of the said circular, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that since Petitioner without any fault of his own, was not provided with the documents so pledged by him even after clearance of the loan with issuance of the NDC on 16.02.2022 till 17.07.2024, Petitioner is eligible and entitled to get the benefit of compensation so provided in Para 6. 4.2. It is contended that since for no fault of the Petitioner, he has to wait for more than 2 years to get back the documents, Opp. Party- Bank is liable to pay compensation in terms of the provisions contained under Para 6 of the circular issued by RBI under Annexure-2. It is accordingly contended that Opp. Party No. 4 be directed to pay the compensation in terms of the said guideline. 5. Since nobody is appearing in spite of due appearance on behalf of the Opp. Party-Bank, this Court has no other alternative than to dispose of the writ petition by permitting the Petitioner to make an appropriate application before Opp. Party No. 4 to get the benefit of compensation in terms of Para 6 of the circular issued by the RBI on 13.09.2023 under Annexure-2. Page 3 of 3. 5.1. It is observed that if any such application is moved before the Opp. Party-Bank within a period of two (2) weeks hence, the said Opp. Party shall do well to take a lawful decision on the same within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of such application within due communication to the Petitioner. 5.2. Opp. Party No. 4 is directed to take a decision strictly in terms of the provisions contained under Para 6 of the aforesaid circular and release the compensation, if the Petitioner is held entitled to get the same after due consideration within the aforesaid time period. 6. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. (BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge Sneha