Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.3076 of 2026 Sarojini Jena ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Prafulla Kumar Mohapatra -versus- State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv. – A.Mohanty, A.S.C. CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 03.02.2026 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ application as well as the documents annexed thereto. 3. The present writ petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer:- It is therefore, humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to:- i) Direct the opposite parties to extend the same financial benefits to the petitioner as has been granted to other teachers pursuant to the judgment in OJC No. 8630 of 1998 (R.C. Muduli v. State of Odisha) as affirmed in SLP (C) No. 31382 of 2008 and thereby pay the arrear dues after allowing TBA benefits as per ORSP Rules, 1985 and 1998 and ACP on completion Page 2 of 3. of 25 and 30 years as per ORSP Rules, 2008 and accordingly revise his pension and release all arrears within a stipulated period; ii) Pass such other order(s)/directions(s) as would be deem fit and proper in the bonafide interest of Justice; 4. It is contended that due to non-sanction of the benefit of TBA and the benefit of ACP, the Petitioner after her retirement is getting pension at a lower rate. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that the claim of the Petitioner is covered by a decision of this Court passed in O.J.C. No. 8630 of 1998 (R.C. Muduli Vs. D.I. of Schools, Salepur & Anr.). It is also contended that the Petitioner is entitled to get the benefit of salary and pension at a higher rate in terms of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Andhra Pradesh and Anr. Vs. Ms. Bina Bai Laxmi Kameswari ((2021) Vol.I ILR Cuttack 481). 5. Learned Standing Counsel on the other hand contended that the Petitioner claiming the extension of the benefit as prayed for has never approached the authority concerned and Annexure-4 has been filed in the year 2023. 6. In view of such submission made by learned counsel for the Parties, this Court while disposing the writ petition, permits the Petitioner to make an appropriate application before the Opp. Party No. 1 within a period of three (3) weeks. If any such application is made by the Petitioner with regard to his claim to get the benefit of TBA & ACP, the same shall be considered and disposed of in accordance with law within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of such representation. However, while taking such a decision the order passed by this Court in the case of R.C. Muduli as well as by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Page 3 of 3. Andhra Pradesh as cited (supra) shall be taken into consideration. 7. With the aforesaid observation/ direction, the writ application stands disposed of. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Anil Designation: Junior Stenographer