IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.20602 of 2026 Simanchal Mishra …. Petitioner Mr. K.P. Mishra, Sr. Adv. Along with Mr. A. Mishra, Adv. -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. …. Opposite Parties Mr. S.P. Das, ASC COROM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No ORDER 14.07.2026 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for Petitioner and learned counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. 3. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer:- “Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to: (i) Issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari, quashing the communication/Order, issued by the Opp.Party No.4, whereby pension under the Employees' Pension Scheme, 1995 has been refused to the Petitioner on the ground of non-completion of 10 years of qualifying service, specially when the Petitioner was re-engaged in 2006 and completed 10 years on the date of superannuation; p. 2 p. 2 (ii) Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus, directing the Opp.Parties to count the entire service, rendered by the Petitioner from 25.02.1989 to 31.03.1996 and from October, 2006 to 30.01.2018, as qualifying service under the Employees' Pension Scheme, 1995 and consequently sanction and disburse the pensionary/retiral benefits, along with admissible arrears, within a stipulated time in accordance with law; (iii) pass such other order(s) or issue direction(s) as may be deemed fit and proper in the bona fide interest of justice; And for which act of kindness, the Petitioner as in duty bound, shall ever pray..” 4. In course of hearing, learned counsel for the Petitioner state that highlighting his grievances, the Petitioner has made a representation to Opposite Party No.4 vide Annexure-6 and the same may be directed to be considered within a stipulated time, to which learned Counsel for the State has no objection. 5. As agreed by learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, disposes of the Writ Petition directing Opposite Party No.4 to consider the representation filed by the petitioner vide Annexure-6 in accordance with law within a period of three (3) months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Jyoti