Page 1 of 2. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.19739 of 2026 Ramesh Kumar Padhy ..... Petitioner Mr. K.C. Sahu, Adv. -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Mr. C.K. Pradhan, AGA Mr. S.K. Patra, Adv. for O.P. No.5 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER 06.07.2026 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 prayed that the Hon'ble Court be pleased to allow the writ petition by directing the Opp. Parties for continuance of GPF subscription in the GPF account no. MJO 54902 of the petitioner by further governing the services of the Petitioner under the Old O.C.S. (Pension) Rules 1992 and existing GPF (O) Rules with all consequential service benefits thereby cancelling the NPS/PRAN account by taking into account the similar order passed by learned OAT as per Annexure-3 being confirmed by this Hon'ble Court under Annexure-4 so also Hon'ble Supreme Court under Annexure-5 as so also in the light of order under Annexure-6 with in a time bound period for the interest of justice. And may pass any other Writ(s), Direction(s), Order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may be deemed fit and proper; Page 2 of 2. And for this 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.3 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 any such representation is filed within the aforesaid time period, Opp. Party No.3 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.3 be communicated to the Petitioner. 6. Since, it is contended that similar claim after being allowed by the tribunal, confirmed by this Court and by the Apex Court vide orders available under Annexures-3 to 5 has been implemented vide order at Annexure-6, relevancy and effects of the orders available under Annexures-3 to 5 and so also the implementation made vide order under Annexure-6 be taken into consideration, if it is applicable to the Petitioner claim. Petitioner is directed to provide copies of the orders passed under Annexures-3 to 5 and so also the order implementing the same under Annexure-6, before O.P. No.3 compliance. 7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. (BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge Madhusmita Designation: JUNIOR STENOGRAPHER