p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P(C) No.5002 of 2025 M/s. Kab Tak Rokoge Security and manpower Services Pvt. Ltd. …. Petitioner Mr. G. P. Jena, Advocate -versus- M/s. Employees State Insurance Corporation, Govt. of India, New Delhi and others …. Opp. Parties Mr. A.P. Ray, Standing Counsel CORAM: JUSTICE MRUGANKA SEKHAR SAHOO Order No. ORDER 21.04.2026 (Hybrid Mode) 02. 1. The matter being in the list is mentioned by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner refers to the memo of date which is filed in Court enclosing the letter dated 18.02.2026 issued by the Regional Director, ESI Corporation, opposite party in the petitioner. The memo states thus: “1. That during pendency of the Writ petition, the opp. parties have issued circular known as Amnesty Scheme 2025 which is valid from 01.10.2025 to 30.09.2026 and the Amnesty Scheme covers the disputes regarding coverage and contribution and disputed damages and also relates to pending Criminal cases. p. 2 2. That since petitioner was to avail the benefits under the scheme, the writ petition No.5002/2025 filed by the petitioner may kindly be permitted to be withdrawn permitting the petitioner to avail the benefits under the Amnesty Scheme 2025.” Memo is taken on record. Scanned copy be updated. Copy of the memo along with annexure has been served on the learned Standing Counsel Mr. A.P. Ray, who usually appears for the opposite party-ESI Corporation. 2. Mr. Ray, learned Standing Counsel for the Opposite Parties being present in the Court shall appear for them. It is submitted by the learned Standing Counsel that he has filed his Vakalatnama but his name is not reflected in the cause list. 3. On verification of the case records available, it is found that the Vakalatnama has not been tagged to the record. Registry shall do well to locate the Vakalatnama and scanned copy be updated. 4. Mr. Ray, learned Standing Counsel for the ESI Corporation has the liberty to file duly executed Vakalatnama again as it is submitted by the learned Standing Counsel that he had filed Vakalatnama in April, 2025 and there is possibility of the said Vakalatnama having been misplaced. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that leave may be granted to avail the benefit of the p. 3 ‘Amnesty Scheme 2025’ promulgated by the opposite parties – ESIC. Office letter dated 18.02.2026 issued to the petitioner by the Regional Director, ESI Corporation, Regional Office, Odisha, Bhubaneswar is scanned and reproduced herein: p. 4 6. The learned Standing Counsel for the opposite parties endorses the statements made in the memo and submissions made at the bar by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 7. In view of the above developments, it is expected that the parties shall work out amicable settlement as per the ‘Amnesty Scheme’ acceptable to both the parties and this Court in no uncertain terms encourages such settlement. 8. It is further clarified that contentions raised in the writ application shall not be bar in any manner whatsoever for the parties to work out amicable settlement in terms of the ‘Amnesty Scheme’. Interim order, if any, passed earlier by this Court shall merge with the order passed today. Any order passed earlier shall not in any manner come in the way of the parties to arrive at a settlement. 9. The writ petition is disposed of with the observations made above. (Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo) Judge Radha