Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No. 550 of 2024 Charu Prasad Singha ..... Petitioner Mr. D.K. Mohapatra, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Mr. S.K. Jee, AGA Mr. A.S. Nandy, Advocate (Opp. Party No. 3) CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER 11.07.2025 Order No. 06 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard Mr. D.K. Mohapatra, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner, Mr. S.K. Jee, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate appearing for the State-Opp. Parties and Mr. A.S. Nandy, learned counsel appearing for Opp. Party No. 3. 3. The present writ petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer:- “It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to:- i) Admit the writ application; ii) Call for the records; iii) Issue a writ of Mandamus directing the opp. parties more particularly opp. party no.5 to revisit the audit report issued vide letter no.1247/LFA (BLS) dated 30.09.2022 of the District Audit Officer under Annexure - 13 by providing necessary opportunity to the petitioner and accordingly the pension and pensionary benefits of the petitioner including gratuity be released in favour of Page 2 of 3. the petitioner with interest within a reasonable time to be stipulated by this Hon'ble Court. iv) And/or pass such other order/orders, direction/directions as this Hon'ble Court may think fit and proper for the ends of justice; And for this act of kindness the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.” 4. It is contended that the Petitioner while continuing in the establishment of Opp. Party No. 3 as a Junior Clerk, he retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.06.2018. After such retirement of the Petitioner, his pension papers were submitted for the purpose of sanction of pension and other pensionary benefits. But taking into account the liability fixed on the Petitioner in the audit report so prepared by the District Audit Officer Local Fund Audit, Balasore under Annexure-13, Petitioners’ pension papers were returned back. It is contended that Petitioner is not at all liable to pay any amount as reflected in the audit report so prepared by Opp. Party No. 5 under Annexure-13. 4.1. It is also contended that without giving an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner, Petitioner has been held liable to pay different amount under Annexure-13 and because of that he is not getting his pension even though he has retired since 30.06.2018. 5. Learned Addl. Govt. Advocate on the other hand contended that if the Petitioner is aggrieved with regard to the liability indicated in the impugned audit report under Annexure-13, let the Petitioner apprise the said fact before Opp. Party No. 5 for reconsideration. 6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made, this Court while disposing the writ petition, permits the Petitioner to file his objection to the audit Page 3 of 3. report so issued by Opp. Party No. 5 under Annexure-13 with regard to the liability fixed against him. It is observed that if any such objection will be filed within a period of three (3) weeks hence along with a copy of this order, Opp. Party No. 5 shall take a fresh decision by giving due opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner within a further period of three (3) months. Opp. Party No. 5 if required, may take the assistance of Opp. Party No. 3 to come to a just decision. 7. Till a decision is taken as directed, no coercive action be taken against the Petitioner. 8. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. (BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge Sneha