Page 1 of 2. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.11876 of 2026 Benudhar Jena ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Sukanta Kumar Mishra -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv. - Mr.C.M.Singh, A.S.C. CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 22.04.2026 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 Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ petition as well as the documents annexed thereto. 3. The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner with the following prayers: - “Under the above circumstances, it is therefore humbly prayed that the Hon'ble Court may be graciously pleased to direct the opp.parties to sanction and release pension in favour of the petitioner and also gratuity and other retiral benefits available to him as per the Orissa Aided Educational Institutions' Employees Retirement Benefit Rules, 1981 and pay the same within a stipulated period as deem fit and proper as his case is squarely covered by the decision in the case of Sarata Chandra Parida versus State of Odisha and others reported in Vol Page 2 of 2. 120 (2015) CLT-813 and in the case of Hemant Kumar Chhotray and others versus State of Odisha and Others, reported in 2024 (I) OLR-709. And/or pass any other writ/writs, order/orders/direction/directions in the fitness of the case.” 4. The subject matter of this petition is substantially similar to the one in Hemanta Kumar Chhotray v. State of Orissa and others, 2024 (1) OLR 709 and therefore, counsel for the Petitioner submits that the benefit given to litigants in the subject case should be extended his client as well. 5. Learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State- Opposite Parties submits that the said matter is subjudice in Writ Appeal No.197 of 2024. However, on being asked, he tells that there is no interim order staying the judgment of the learned Single Judge. This Court in a number of similar matters has already ordered extension of the said benefits subject to outcome of the Writ Appeal and therefore, the same course needs to be adopted here also, if there are no other legal impediments. 6. Ordered accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of subject to outcome of the writ appeal mentioned above. Compliance within eight(8) weeks. Web copy of order to be acted upon by all concerned. (Aditya Kumar Mohapatra) Judge Rubi