IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P (C ) No.24251 of 2024 Sidharth Nanda …. Appellant Mr. J.K. Khuntia, Adv. -versus- State of Odisha & Others …. Respondents Mr. C.K. Pradhan, AGA . CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER 06.08.2025 05. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. The Present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia challenging order dt.08.09.2022 so passed by Opp. Party No.4 under Annexure-10. Vide the said order, claim of the Petitioner to get the benefit of appointment under the Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme was rejected. 4. It is contended that on the death of the deceased employee on 13.03.2018, Petitioner made the application within the prescribed time period to get the benefit of appointment under the Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme. In spite of various communications being made with regard to consideration of the claim when no final decision was taken, Petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.(C ) No.13188 of p. 2 p. 2 2022. This Court vide order dt.24.05.2022 under Annexure-8 when directed the competent authority- Opp. party No.4 to take a decision on the Petitioner’s claim, while considering the same, the same has been rejected vide the impugned order dt.08.09.2022 under Annexure-10. 4.2. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that since the deceased employee died in the year 2018 and the application was made prior to coming into force of OCS (Rehabilitation Assistance) Amended Rules, 2020, rejection of the Petitioner’s claim could not have been made relying on the OCS (Rehabilitation Assistance) Amended Rules, 2020. 4.3. It is contended that such a decision taken vide the impugned order under Annexure-10 is not sustainable in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in the case of Malayananda Sethi Vs. State of Orissa and Others. It is also contended that in the meantime, Government has come up with new notification on 04.04.2025 inter alia holding as follows: xxx xxx xxx 2. In the Odisha Civil Services (Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules, 2020 (hereinafter referred to as the "said rules"), in rule 6,- (i) for sub-rule (9), the following sub-rule shall be substituted, namely:- "(9) (a) All pending applications, relating to death of Government employee prior to the date of commencement of the Odisha Civil Services p. 3 p. 3 (Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules, 2020 shall be dealt in accordance with the rules prevailing on the date of death of Government employee for appointment under Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme: Provided that in case the death of Government employee occurred on or after commencement of the Odisha Civil Service (Rehabilitation Assistance) Amendment Rules, 2016 and before commencement of the Odisha Civil Services (Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules, 2020, shall be governed by the provisions of the Odisha Civil Service Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules, 1990. Xxx xxx xxx 4.4. It is accordingly contended that in view of the notification issued on 04.04.2025 and the clarification issued on 13.06.2025, Petitioner’s claim is required to be considered under the provisions of OCS (Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules, 1990 with quashing of the impugned rejection. 5. Learned Addl. Govt. Advocate also fairly contended that in view of the notification issued on 04.04.2025 and the clarification subsequently issued on 13.06.2025, Petitioner’s claim is required to be considered under the provisions of OCS (Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules, 1990. 6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and considering the submission made and taking into account the fact that after the death of the deceased employee on 13.06.2018, the applications was made within the stipulated time period, rejection of the Petitioner’s claim relying on the provisions p. 4 p. 4 contained under OCS (Rehabilitation Assistance) Rules, 2020 is not sustainable in the eye of law. 6.1. This Court placing reliance on the notification issued on 04.04.2025 and the clarification issued on 13.06.2025 is inclined to quash the impugned rejection so passed on 08.09.2022 under Annexure-10. While quashing the said order, the matter is remitted to Opp. party No.4 to take a fresh decision in the light of the notification issued on dt.04.04.2025 and clarification issued on 13.06.2025 This Court directs Opp. party No.4 to take a fresh decision within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of this order. 6.2. The Writ Petition along with the I.A accordingly stands disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Sangita