Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CONTC No.6186 of 2025 Sanatan Sahu ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Sudhashree Pasayat, A.rout, A.parida -versus- prem kumar jha,ifs,managing director odisha forest development corporation ltd. ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv. - Sri Santosh Ku. Pattanaik (Sr. Adv.) Mr. Prabuddha ku. Pattanaik, Sakti Prasad Das, U.C.Mohanty CORAM: MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 01.05.2026 Order No. 09. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the Parties. 3. Alleging non-compliance of order dated 21.07.2025 passed in W.P.(C) No.19820 of 2025 the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present contempt application. 4. On perusal of order dated 21.07.2025 it appears that this Court while disposing of the writ application directed the Opposite Party No.2 to consider the representation of the Petitioner with a prayer for grant of interest for the delayed period Page 2 of 3. in releasing the retirement benefits in favour of the Petitioner. It was further directed that in the event it is found that the Petitioner is entitled to get such amount, the Opposite Parties were directed to pay interest @ 18% in terms of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in D.D. Tewari (D) through L.Rs. vs. Uttar Haryana Bijili Vitran Nigam Ltd., reported in 2015 (1) OLR (SC) 81. Alleging violation of such order the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present contempt application. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that although the Petitioner is retired since 2012 some portion of the retirement dues were paid in the year 2016 and the balance were paid after the intervention of this Court in the year 2023. Thus it was argued that there is admittedly delay in disbursal of the retirement dues as is due and admissible to the Petitioner. 6. Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel appearing for the Opposite Parties-Contemnors on the other hand contended that the Petitioner has already been paid with his due and that he is not entitled to the interest as has been claimed. He further submitted that another writ application filed by the Petitioner in W.P.(C) No.15445 of 2012 is still pending for adjudication. It was also brought to the notice of the Court that an interim order was passed in the said writ application on 24.08.2012 directing the Opposite Parties that no recovery shall be made of the retirement dues of the Petitioner subject to Petitioner furnishing an indemnity bond to that effect. 7. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Opposite Party-Contemnor contended that the Opposite Parties-Contemnors have not violated the Court’s order and in the meantime the Page 3 of 3. amount has already been paid. It was also contended that the Petitioner is not entitled to the interest as has been claimed by him. 8. Taking into consideration, the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the respective Parties, on a close scrutiny of the order dated 21.07.2025 alleged to have been violated this Court is of the view that the claim for payment of interest for the delayed period is to be adjudicated in the main writ application W.P.(C) No.15445 of 2012 which is pending bearing. 9. In such view of the matter, the contempt proceeding is dropped by granting liberty to the Petitioner to raise the question of payment of interest in W.P.(C) No.15445 of 2012. 10. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the CONTC application stand dropped. ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Sisir Designation: PERSONAL ASSISTANT