[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Bipin Kumar Dash vs State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite ... on 20 January, 2026
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.1592 of 2026
Bipin Kumar Dash ..... Petitioner
Represented by Adv. -
Sangram Jena
-versus-
State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties
Represented by Adv. -
S.K. Parhi, A.S.C.
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
MOHAPATRA
ORDER
20.01.2026
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:-
"It is therefore, most humbly prayed that this
Hon'ble Court be graciously pleased to:-
i) Admit the writ application.
ii) Call for the records.
iii) Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other
writ/writs, direction/directions, directing the State-
Opposite parties to extend the benefit of pension and
other retiral benefits in favour of the present petitioner on
account of his retirement in terms of the Odisha Aided
Educational Institution Employees Retirement Benefit
Rule, 1981, keeping in view the ratio decided in the case
of Sarat Ch. Parida-vrs.-State of Odisha & Ors.
reported in (2015) (II) ILR-CTC page-94 so also the
subsequent common judgment passed in the case of
Hemant Kumar Chhotaray-vrs.-State of Odisha &
Ors. reported in 2024(I)OLR-709 within a reasonable
time to be stipulated by this Hon'ble Court.
iv) And/or pass any other order/orders, direction/
directions as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper for
the ends of justice."
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 Govt. Advocate 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
Anil
Designation: Junior Stenographer
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 21-Jan-2026 16:58:00
