Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.11127 of 2025 Anandini Acharya ..... Petitioner Represented By Adv. - Kirtan Dang -versus- 1) State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Parties 2) The Chief Engineer Rural Works 3) The Superintending Engineer Rural Works(p.h) Division 4) The Asstt. Executive Engineer Rural Works(p.h) Sub-division 5) Controller Of Accounts Odisha, Bbsr Represented By Adv. – Ms. S.Nayak, A.S.C. CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA Order No. ORDER 29.04.2025 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ application as well as documents annexed thereto. 3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the following prayer: “Therefore it is respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit this writ petition issue RULE NISI calling upon the opposite parties for show cause as to why the Direction will not be issued for providing family pension to the petitioner with an immediate effect. Thus Hon'ble Court also made it Page 2 of 3. absolute if the said opposite parties fails to file sufficient cause or show insufficient cause and after hearing from the parties this Hon'ble Court may direct to the opposite parties in the writ of mandamus for providing family pension to the petitioner within a stipulated time on this Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct to the opposite party no.2 to dispose of the representation dated 20.9.2024 under Annexure 3 within a stipulated time by providing adequate opportunity of hearing to the petitioner for the interest of justice and equity. This Hon'ble Court be pleased to pass any order(s) may direct any direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit just and proper in this case.” 4. In course of hearing of the writ application, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner ventilating his grievance has submitted representation before the Chief Engineer Rural Works Unit-IX, Bhubaneswar, Opposite Party No.2 under Annexure-3. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the said representation is pending as of now. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that a direction be issued to the Opposite Party No.2 to consider the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-3 within a stipulated period of time. 5. Learned Additional Standing Counsel submits that she has no objection if the representation of the Petitioner is considered by the Opposite Party No.2, which is stated to be pending, in accordance with law within a stipulated period of time. 6. Considering the limited nature of grievance of the Petitioner, the writ application is disposed of at the stage of admission with a direction to the Opposite Party No.2 to consider the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-3 within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. The Opposite Party No.2 shall do well to dispose of the representation of the Page 3 of 3. Petitioner under Annexure-3 by passing a speaking and reasoned order. The decision so taken by the Opposite Party No.2 be also communicated to the Petitioner within ten days thereafter. 7. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ application stands disposed of. 8. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Rubi