Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2026 DAILYLAW 2017 (ORI)

NEPAL PANDA v. CHAIRMAN UTKAL GRAMEEN BANK, HEAD OFFICE, BALANGIR

WP(C)/6679/2026 · 2026-03-30

Biraja Prasanna Satapathy

Writ Petition (Civil)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page 1 of 2. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No. 6679 of 2026 Nepal Panda ..... Petitioner Mr. S. K. Purohit, Advocate -versus- Chairman Utkal Gramin Bank, Balangir & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Mr. A. Tripathy, AGA CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER 30.03.2026 Order No. 01 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the Opp. Parties. 3. Petitioner has filed the present writ petition inter alia with the following prayer:- “It is therefore prays that, your Lordships may be graciously pleased to admit this case, issue notice to the Opp. parties asking them as to why the period of suspension of the employee shall not count for the purpose of pension when the said has been imposed before the commencement of the pension regulation, 2018 when it was not in existence with the further direction to pay the remaining subsistence amount of the petitioner as per pay revisions as per Annexure-3 and release the commutation of pension as per Annexure-6 letter and on hearing the O.Ps., if they show no or inadequate reasons, then direct the O.Ps. to pay the substance allowance as per entitlement for the period of suspension with the direction to include the suspension period as qualifying service for pension and pay the Page 2 of 2. commutation of pension within a scheduled time frame as deemed fit and proper by Your Lordships; And, pass any other order/further order as deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case; And for such act of kindness the petitioner shall as in duty bound ever pray.” 4. However, taking into account the claim raised in the present Writ Petition, liberty is granted to the Petitioner to make a fresh representation before Opp. Party No. 2 by enclosing all the relevant documents and citations in support of his claim, if any, within a period of three (3) weeks hence. 5. It is observed that if such representation is filed within the aforesaid time period, Opp. Party No. 2 shall do well to take a lawful decision on the same within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of such representation. The order so passed by Opp. Party No. 2 be communicated to the Petitioner. 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. (BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge Sipra Orissa, Cuttack