p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLREV No.158 of 2026 1. Kabita Sahu 2. Duba Samal 3. Pradeep Samal … Petitioners Mr. S. Mohapatra, Advocate -versus- 1. State of Odisha 2. Paresh Kumar Swain 3. M/s. Swagatam Tent House, Infront of Satyam Hospital, Biju Pattnaik College Road, Jaydev Bihar, BBSR …. Opposite Parties Mr. S. Panigrahi, ASC Mr. S. K. Zafarulla, Advocate CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH Order No. ORDER 15.05.2026 05. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and learned counsel for the Opposite Parties. 2. The Petitioners are the respondents in Criminal Appeal No.2 of 2021. Assailing the observation in the order dated 02.09.2025 by which, while dismissing this appeal, the amounts were not released primarily on the ground that the order may be subject matter of further challenge, this revision is preferred. 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner urges with vehemence that the impugned order is in patent p. 2 violation of the provisions of Payment of Wages Act, 1963 and in this context, attention of this Court is drawn to the provisions as contained in Section 17-A of the said Act. For convenience of reference, the said act is extracted hereunder:- “17A. Conditional attachment of property of employer or other person responsible for payment of wages.—(1) Where at any time after an application has been made under sub-section (2) of section 15 the authority, or where at any time after an appeal has been filed under section 17 by an employed person or 4[any legal practitioner or any official of a registered trade union authorised in writing to act on his behalf or any Inspector under this Act or any other person permitted by the authority to make an application under sub-section (2) of section 15] the Court referred to in that section, is satisfied that the employer or other person responsible for the payment of wages under section 3 is likely to evade payment of any amount that may be directed to be paid under section 15 or section 17, the authority or the court, as the case may be, except in cases where the authority or court is of opinion that the ends of justice would be defeated by the delay, after giving the employer or other person an opportunity of being heard, may direct the attachment of so much of the property of the employer or other person responsible for the payment of wages as is, in the opinion of the authority p. 3 or court, sufficient to satisfy the amount which may be payable under the direction. (2) The provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), relating to attachment before judgment under that Code shall, so far as may be, apply to any order for attachment under sub-section (1).” 4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the Petitioners that on a plain reading of the said Act, the order passed by the learned Appellate Court is without jurisdiction, hence, ought to be interfered with. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the Opposite Parties, Mr. Zafarulla, on the other hand, submits that there is no illegality warranting interference. He further submits that the learned Appellate Court passed the order since release of the amount would have rendered any subsequent challenge infructuous. As such, the matter does not merit consideration. 6. It is apt to note that assailing the selfsame order of the Appellate Authority the Opposite Party herein (employer) had filed Criminal Revision No.308 of 2026 which was on board today. And, the same has been dismissed on the ground of delay by order passed today. 7. In view of the same, the impugned observation for non-release is set aside. 8. The amount in question which is stated to be lying in deposit shall be released to the Petitioner p. 4 within a period of one week from the date of production of the copy of this order along with accrued interest, if any. 9. Accordingly, this criminal revision stands disposed of. 10. Compliance regarding the release of the amount as directed shall be submitted in the Registry, in this disposed of matter, to be placed for consideration on 22.06.2026. 11. List this matter on 22.06.2026 as a disposed of matter. (V. NARASINGH) Judge Jina