Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2026 DAILYLAW 772 (ORI)

SURENDRANATH MOHANTY v. STATE OF ODISHA

WP(C)/3426/2026 · 2026-03-05

Biraja Prasanna Satapathy

Writ Petition (Civil)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.3426 of 2026 Surendranath Mohanty …. Petitioner Mr. A.K. Das, 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 05.03.2026 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:- “It is, therefore, prayed that your lordships may be pleased to direct the State/0.P.No.1 to pay interest on the illegally withholding of pensionary dues till 4.1.2023 without any fault of the petitioner or without any outstanding Govt. dues against him or any order of penalty in any Disciplinary of Criminal Proceedings although the petitioner van retired on super-annuation on 31.1.2018 All and entitled to interest 10% p.a. from 1.2.2018 till 4.1.2023 in view of the settled principle of law by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Gorakhpur University & Ors. Vs. Dr.Sitalaprasad Nagendra and Ors.reported in (2001)2 ATT.SC.16l and in the case of D.D.Tewari (D)through L.Rs. Vs. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigan Ltd.reported in 2015 (1)OLR (SC)-81. within a stipulated time as fixed by this Hon'ble Court. And pass any other order/(s) as deemed fit and proper in the ends of justice. And for which act of kindness, the petitioner shall as in duty bound 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.1 vide Annexure-5 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.1 to consider the representation filed by the petitioner vide Annexure-5 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