Page 1 of 2. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CONTC No.3633 of 2024 Kailash Chandra Jena ..... Petitioner Represented By Adv. - M/s.basudev Barik -versus- Anu Garg, I.A.S. & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties/ Contemnors Represented By Adv. – Sasmita Nayak, A.S.C. CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 31.10.2025 Order No. 03. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned counsel for the Contemnors. 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that being aggrieved by non-compliance of order dated 18.11.2022 passed in W.P.(C) No.27937 of 2022, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present contempt application. 4. In course of his argument, learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that as against order dated 18.11.2022, the State- Opposite Parties initially preferred a writ appeal bearing W.A. No.398 of 2023 which was disposed of on 21.11.2023 thereby dismissing the writ appeal on merit. Thereafter, the State-Opposite Parties preferred an SLP before the Hon’ble Supreme Court by Page 2 of 2. filing SLP (C) No.16560 of 2024. The abovenoted SLP was taken up by the Hon’ble Supreme Court along with a batch of similar other matters. By virtue of the common judgment dated 24.07.2025 passed in The State of Odisha & Ors. v. G. Balakrishna (Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No.33400 of 2023). All connected leave applications were dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Thus, the order passed by this Court has been affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. At this juncture, learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that despite the order passed by this Court having been upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and that the same has attained finality, however, the Opposite Parties-Contemnors have not taken any steps to ensure that the order passed by this Court is implemented. 5. On the request of learned counsel for the Contemnor, he is granted six weeks’ time, as a last chance, to ensure that the order passed by this Court as confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in G. Balakrishna’s case (supra) is implemented within the period of six weeks, failing which the Contemnors-Opposite Parties shall be asked to appear before this Court and explain as to why they shall not be proceeded against under the Contempt of Court’s Act. 6. Accordingly, the contempt application is disposed of. However, liberty is given to the petitioner to revive the same, in the event, the Opposite Parties fail to implement the order dated 18.11.2022 within the aforesaid time stipulation. ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Sisir Designation: Personal Assistant