Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.28075 of 2025 Anupama Panda ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Debendranath Misra -versus- State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv. - Mr. D.K.Sahu, A.G.A. CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 22.01.2026 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ application as well as the documents annexed thereto. 3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the following prayer: “The petitioner, therefore, pray that this Hon'ble Court would graciously be pleased to issue Rule Nisi calling upon the opp. parties to show cause as to why the Petitioner's husband shall not be provided with the scale of pay as is admissible under the University Grant Commission guidelines from the date of his entitlement till his death on 20.05.2021. If the opp. parties tail to show cause or show insufficient cause the said Rule be made absolute with directions to the Opposite parties Page 2 of 3. to allow U.G.C Scale of Pay in favor of her deceased husband Sudhanshu Mohan Panda from his date of entitlement till his death dated 20.05.2021 and pay the differential amount as well as the differential family pensionary amount to the petitioner from 21.05.2021 accordingly till the date of actual payment with further direction to complete the exercise within a stipulated period. And/or pass such other order/orders, issue such other writ/writs this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case in order to provide complete relief to the petitioner.” 4. It is stated by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that being aggrieved by the inaction of the Opposite Parties in releasing the U.G.C. Scale of Pay from the date of entitlement of the Petitioner and the revise family pension as well as other benefits, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition. He further contended that the Petitioner has already approached the Opposite Party No.2 by filing a detailed representation on 28.08.2023 at Annexure-9, however, no final decision has been taken on such representation. 5. Learned counsel for the State submits that he 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 Page 3 of 3. the Petitioner under Annexure-9 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 Petitioner under Annexure-9 by passing a speaking and reasoned order. The decision so taken by the Opposite Party No.2 be also communicated to the Petitioner within two weeks thereafter. 7. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ application stands disposed of. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. ( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra ) Judge Rubi