IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.A. No.553 of 2025 Commissioner, Cuttack Municipal Corporation, Cuttack …. Appellant Mr. Debasmita Nayak, Advocate -Versus- Hrushikesh Pani and others …. Respondents Mr. B.S, Tripathy, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. M.K. Panda, Advocate for R/1 Mr. J.K. Khandayatray, ASC for R/1 to 4 CORAM: JUSTICE KRISHNA S. DIXIT JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH Order No. 01. ORDER 12.05.2026 Memo of appearance of learned Senior Counsel-Mr. B.S. Tripathy is filed through advocate on record-Mr. M.K. Panda. The same is taken on record. 2. This Intra-Court appeal calls in question an interim order dated 20.02.2025 in the then pending W.P.(C) No.18276 of 2024 filed by the OP-Employee. The impugned order, being short and sweet, reads as under: “1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. 2. This application has been filed by the Petitioner in seeking a direction from this Court to the Opposite Parties to sanction his Leave Salary, Gratuity and Final Pension within a time limit in compliance of the order dated 18.11.2024 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.18276 of 2024. 3. Heard. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner went several times to the office of the Opposite Party No.4 to get his retiral dues but each time except assurance nothing has been given except cost amount. Though in the meantime, more than 35 months has elapsed from his retirement, the Petitioner has not yet received his retiral dues like Leave Salary, Gratuity etc. 5. Considering the submissions made, the Commissioner, Cuttack Municipal Corporation, Cuttack/Opposite Party No.4 is directed to release the pensionary benefits to the Petitioner within a period of fifteen days from today, failing which, the Commissioner, Cuttack Municipal Corporation, Cuttack/Opposite Party No.4 shall pay Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) to the pensioner as a cost for delaying the pension and other retiral benefits. 6. Accordingly, the I.A. is disposed of.” 3. Having heard learned counsel for the Parties and having perused the Appeal papers, we grant limited interference in the matter broadly agreeing with the reasoning part of the learned Single Judge as reflected in the impugned order. The added reason is the enormous delay brooked in settling the terminal benefits including the pension of the Respondent-Employee, who had put in service a little less than 30 years. The above being said, we are inclined to reduce the cost amount from Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) only to Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Thousand) only keeping in view Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) only already paid earlier by way of costs. In the above circumstances, the impugned order is modified only to the extent of downwardly revising the cost amount from Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) only to Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Thousand) only, if it is paid to the Respondent-Employee within two weeks, failing which the whole amount of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) only plus Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) only becomes payable by the Appellant. Writ Appeal is accordingly disposed off. Web copy of order to be acted upon by all concerned. (Krishna S. Dixit) Judge ( Chittaranjan Dash ) Judge Anisha Designation: Jr. Stenographer