IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.13059 of 2025 Raghunath Mantry …. Petitioner Mr. S.K. Das, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and Others …. Opposite Parties Mr. A. Pati, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER 23.06.2025 02. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties. 3. Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition inter alia with the following prayer:- “Under the above circumstances, it is therefore humbly prayed that the Hon'ble Court be graciously pleased to direct the Opp. Party No.2 to complete the departmental proceeding so instituted against the petitioner on 29.05.2024 under Annexure-4 within a stipulated period and to clear up the retiral benefits including the pension of the petitioner forthwith; And further the Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the Opp. Parties to pay the provisional pension to the petitioner to which he is entitled to notwithstanding the pending proceeding against him; And/or pas any other appropriate writ/writs, order/orders and direction/directions in the fitness of the case; And for this act of kindness as in duty bound the Petitioner shall ever pray.” 4. Pursuant to the order dtd.12.05.2025, it is fairly contended by the learned counsel appearing for the Parties p. 2 p. 2 that Petitioner in the meantime has been sanctioned with the provisional pension w.e.f. April, 2025. 5. Basing on the instruction, learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State contended that the proceeding initiated against the Petitioner vide Memorandum dtd.29.05.2024 will be finalized by the Director Secondary Education –Opposite Party No.2 in due process and in accordance with the guidelines. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that because of the pendency of the proceeding, Petitioner is not getting his retiral benefits as due and admissible and the proceeding was initiated just one month prior to his retirement. 6.1. It is also contended that even though Petitioner has filed the written statement of defence on 28.06.2024 under Annexure-5, but till date no further progress has been made to dispose of the proceeding. 6.2. It is accordingly contended that the proceeding be targeted. 7. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made, this Court while disposing the Writ Petition directs Opposite Party No.2 to dispose of the proceeding as expeditiously as possible preferably by the end of this year, if there is no other legal impediment. p. 3 p. 3 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Subrat