[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Sobhabati Mallik vs ) State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Parties on 21 January, 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
EXP No.10 of 2024
Sobhabati Mallik ..... Petitioner
Represented by Adv. -
Mr. Trilochan Panigrahi
-versus-
1) State of Odisha ..... Opposite Parties
2) Sr. Accounts Officer, A.G. Represented by Adv. -
(A and E) ,Odisha Mr. S.K. Patra
3) Accountant General (A and E), (S.C.A.G.), Mr. Sarathi
Odisha Jyoti Mohanty, A.S.C.
CORAM:
REGISTRAR (JUDICIAL)
ORDER
21.01.2026
Order No.
15. Perused the case records, disposed of order of Hon'ble
Court dated 09.12.2021 passed in WP(C) No.38224 of 2021.
The record is posted today for orders.
The claim of the petitioner is that she had filed a writ
petition bearing WP(C) No 38224 of 2021. While disposing
writ application, the Hon'ble Court vide order dated
09.12.2021 had directed the Opposite Party No. 1 to
consider her representation within 15 days taking into
consideration Annexures 5 & 6 and to pass a reasoned and
speaking order as early as possible preferably within a
period of three months from the date of receipt of such
representation along with certified copy of the order.
However, despite all her efforts no action has been taken as
per the direction of the Hon'ble Court. Being compelled, she
had again preferred WP(C) No. 13561 of 2024 wherein liberty
has been given to file application as per Chapter-XXVIII of
the Rules of High Court of Orissa, 1948.
During the pendency of this execution proceeding
though notices were issued to the Opposite Parties, O.P. No.
1 did not appear. Though O.P. No. 2 and 3 appeared and
filed show cause, no plausible reason could be assigned for
not complying the order of the Hon'ble Court.
On the other hand, O.P. No. 3 submitted show cause
mentioning therein that the petitioner is the second wife of
Government servant Shri Basanta Kumar Mallick. As per
Rule 56(6) of the O.C.S. (Pension) Rules, 1992 family
pension cannot be granted in favour of the petitioner who
had married Basanta Kumar Mallick during the subsistence
of his first marriage. Accordingly, they had intimated O.P.
No. 1 to do the needful. But despite of repeated reminders
no information has been received from O.P. No. 1.
Heard both sides. Perused the case record which
reveals that though O.P. No. 1 was intimated by O.P. No. 3
to take necessary action to comply with the order of the
Hon'ble Court passed in W.P.(C) No. 38224 of 2021 no
action has been taken. Despite notice in this execution
petition also, no action has been taken.
Rule 3 of Chapter-XXVIII of the Rules of the High
Court of Orissa, 1948 provides that the execution of the
decrees can be executed by attachment of property of the
Judgement-Debtor or by the arrest and detention in civil
prison. As because the Judgment-Debtor i.e. O.P. No. 1 did
not comply the order of the Hon'ble Court the same shall be
executed by the above process as provided in Rule 3 of
Chapter-XXVIII of the Rules of the High Court of Orissa,
1948. Accordingly, it is directed to issue notice to O.P. No. 1
to submit show cause in shape of affidavit as to why the
order of the Hon'ble Court shall not be executed in the above
process. The copy of the order shall be sent to O.P. No. 1
through email.
Put up on 04.02.2026 for receipt of show cause
affidavit from O.P. No. 1.
Registrar (Judicial)
Lawzima
