IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.12048 of 2026 Runubala Nayak …. Petitioner Mr. L.N. Patel, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & Others …. Opp. Parties Mr. U.C. Behura, AGA CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH Order No. ORDER 01.05.2026 01. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Parties. 2. By means of this application, the Petitioner seeks the following relief:- “i. To direct the Opp. Party No.3 to accept the claim application in appropriate format in Form No. I and II from the Petitioner and proforma Opp. Party No.5 to 7 within a reasonable time line as this Hon'ble Court deems just and proper. Or, in alternative; ii. To direct the Opp. Party No.4 to consider the claim application submitted by the Petitioner Under Annexure-4 series for grant compensation in favour of the Petitioner and Proforma 0pp. Party No.5 to 7 with reference to and in consonance with the provisions contemplated u/s.l61 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 read with the provisions of Compensation to Victims of Hit and Run Motor Accidents Scheme, 2022; Further; iii. To quash the rejection letter of the Opp.Party No.3 in the rejecting the claim of the Petitioner to transmitted through the grievance portal of Opp.Party No.2 vide letter No.2905 dtd.l4- 07-2025 under Annexure-4;” 3. Mr. Patel, learned counsel for the Petitioner while addressing the grievance of the Petitioner, drew the attention of this Court to Annexure-4, which is an order passed by the Sub- Collector, Kamakhyanagar dated 14.04.2025. The Sub-Collector, p. 2 while addressing the grievance of the Petitioner, declined to pay the relief by way of compensation from the Solatium Fund only on the ground that the Petitioner has not made the application under the appropriate format within the stipulated period i.e. one year from the date of accident as notified by the Government in notification dated 18.07.2023. 4. Mr. Behura, learned AGA submits that the notification has been issued in conformity with the provision under Section 161 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 and as such the impugned order passed by the Sub-Collector is in accordance with law. 5. Needless to mention that the aforesaid provision under Section 161 of the Act has been extended as a benevolent measure, for victims who die in hit-and-run in motor accidents. The applicant belongs to a poor stratum of society. In such an eventuality, expecting the applicant to pursue her claim for the Solatium Fund cannot be expected from the applicant who are more in search of their livelihood, unless she is extended such assistance from some source making them aware of the benefit. Incidentally, upon coming to know of the provision from some sources for fixed compensation to the tune of Rupees Two Lakhs, the Petitioner moved an application seeking for compensation. However, the Sub-Collector, while resorting to the relevant provision being in technicality, declined to grant the same. 6. Keeping in view the very object of the provision made to the help the victims of the incident, the mere application having not made within the stipulated time cannot deter the authority to extend the benefit. In the event the grievance of the Petitioner is p. 3 nipped in the bud solely on technicalities, the same would frustrate the purport and intent of the benevolent legislation. 7. While setting aside the impugned order dated 14.07.2025 passed by the Sub-Collector, Kamakhyanagar, it is directed that the grievance application of the Petitioner shall be dealt with sympathetically, not being strictly construing the date of submission of application and dispose of the same in accordance with law within a period of three weeks from the date of this order. In case the applicant is found entitled to the benefit the same disbursed forth with in her account. A free copy of this order be supplied to the learned AGA for onward transmission to the authority for compliance. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. (Chittaranjan Dash) Judge Sarbani Designation: Junior Stenographer