Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.15976 of 2025 Santosh Kumar Mahabhoi & Ors. ..... Petitioners Represented By Adv. - Sushanta Kumar Mishra -versus- State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Represented By Adv. – U.C. Jena, A.S.C. CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 13.06.2025 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners as well as learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ application as well as the documents annexed thereto. 3. The Petitioners have filed the present writ application with the following prayer: “It is therefore, most humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be graciously pleased to: (i) Admit the writ application; (ii) Call for the record; (iii) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ/writs, direction/directions directing the Page 2 of 3. opposite parties more particularly opposite party nos. 1 to 3 to extend the actual differential revised arrear salary with effect from 01.01.2016 to 30.09.2017, as per the Odisha Revised Scale of Pay Rules, 2017, as has been extended to the counterpart working in Government Colleges/Institutions, in terms of the Finance department Resolution dated 20.09.2017 under Annexurfe-2,4,5 respectively, by suitably modifying clause-18 of the Govt. resolution dt.19.12.2017 issued by the Opp. Party No.1 under Annexure-3, and to extent all other consequential benefits in terms of Rule-9(1) of the Orissa Education (Recruitment and Condition of Service of Teaching and Members of the Staff of Aided Education Institution) Rules, 1974, and further the pension of the petitioner may be revised accordingly, keeping in view the law laid down in the case of Smt. Dipti Roy vrs. State of Orissa and others reported in 2004(II) OLR page 718 So also the law decided in the case of Bijay Ketan Khatua vrs. State of Orissa and others reported in 2015 (I) OLR 452 and Raghunath Parhi Vrs. State of Odisha & Ors. Reported in 2023 SCC Online Ori 6452, within a reasonable time stipulated by this Hon’ble court.” 4. In course of hearing, learned counsel for the Petitioners states that highlighting his grievances, the Petitioners have made a representation to Opposite Party No.1 vide Annexure-6 and the same may be directed to be considered taking into account the decision of this Court passed in the case of Bijay Ketan Khatua- vrs-State of Orissa and others reported in 2015(I) OLR 452 and in the case of Raghunath Parhi vs. State of Odisha & Others, reported in 2023 SCC Online Ori 6452 within a stipulated time, to which learned Counsel for the State has no objection. 5. 5. As agreed by learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, this Court, without expressing any opinion on Page 3 of 3. the merits of the case, disposes of the Writ Petition directing Opposite Party No.1 to consider the representation filed by the petitioners vide Annexure-6 taking into account the decision of this Court passed in the case of Bijay Ketan Khatua-vrs-State of Orissa and others reported in 2015(I) OLR 452 and in the case of Raghunath Parhi Vs. State of Odisha & Others, reported in 2023 SCC Online Ori 6452 within a period of two (2) months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. Petitioners are directed to provide copy of this order along with a decision in the case of Bijay Ketan Khatua and Raghunath Parhi before Opposite Party No.1 for compliance. 6. With the aforesaid observation/ direction, the writ application stands disposed of. 7. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Vacation Judge Anil Designation: Junior Stenographer