MRUTYUNJAY MAHAKUL vs THE STATE OF ODISHA — WP(C)/18047/2026

Case under Constitution of India, 1950 Section 226,227. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 17th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: ODHC010433682026

Filing Number

WP(C)/26123/2026

Filing Date

08-Jun-2026

Registration No

WP(C)/18047/2026

Registration Date

08-Jun-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Biraja Prasanna Satapathy

Coram

Mr. Justice Biraja Prasanna Satapathy

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

SERVICE MATTERS ( 31 )

Sub-Category

PENSION ( 19 )

Judicial Branch

Civil Section

Decision Date

17-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Last updated 19-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India, 1950 Section 226,227

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.MRUTYUNJAY MAHAKUL

    Adv. KRUSHNA CHANDRA RATH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF ODISHA

  2. 2.THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT., FINANCE DEPARTMENT, ODISHA, BHUBANESWAR

  3. 3.THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, OPTCL, BHUBANESWAR

  4. 4.THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, GRIDCO, BHUBANESWAR

  5. 5.CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, TPWODL, SAMBALPUR

  6. 6.THE SECRETARY, ODISHA ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION, BHUBANESWAR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 17-Jun-2026

    Mr. Justice Biraja Prasanna SatapathyView PDF

    Case Summary: The High Court of Orissa disposed of the writ petition by directing the respondent (Opposite Party No.5) to decide the petitioner's pending representation regarding admission to the Old Pension Scheme 1992 and reinstatement in GPF/CPF within three months, in accordance with law and considering the applicability of the Sri Anand Dash precedent, without expressing opinion on the case merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 17-Jun-2026

    Fresh Admission

    Mr. Justice Biraja Prasanna Satapathy

  4. 08-Jun-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP(C)/18047/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: The High Court of Orissa disposed of the writ petition by directing the respondent (Opposite Party No.5) to decide the petitioner's pending representation regarding admission to the Old Pension Scheme 1992 and reinstatement in GPF/CPF within three months, in accordance with law and considering the applicability of the Sri Anand Dash precedent, without expressing opinion on the case merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case