Orissa High Court
WP(C)/24916/2026 of NIBEDITA DEHURY Vs REGIONAL MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, BHUBANESWAR on 8 September 2026
of 3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.24916 of 2026 ODHC010569992026 Nibedita Dehury …. Petitioner Mr. Ramakanta Das, Advocate -versus- Regional Manager, State Bank of India, Main Branch, Bhubaneswar, Khurdha and another …. Opp. Parties CORAM: JUSTICE MRUGANKA SEKHAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.24916 of 2026
ODHC010569992026
Nibedita Dehury
….
Petitioner
Mr. Ramakanta Das, Advocate
-versus-
Regional Manager, State
Bank of India, Main
Branch, Bhubaneswar,
Khurdha and another
….
Opp. Parties
CORAM:
JUSTICE MRUGANKA SEKHAR SAHOO
Order No.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
08.09.2026 (Hybrid Mode)
01.
1. The petitioner before this Court is aggrieved by the order dated 17.02.2026 passed by the Assistant General Manager (PPG)-Opp. Party No.2, State Bank of India rejecting her prayer for to get family pension under the Bank’s Pension Regulation.
She has stated to have married late Mayadhar Dehury, who is an ex-employee of the State Bank of India. It is also stated that from her wedlock with late Shri Dehury two children were born.
2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner did not have nomination in her favour as wife by the deceased employee to get the family pension. Digitally Signed Signed by: RAJESH KUMAR BADHEI Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 09-Sep-2026 16:43:56 Signature Not Verified
3. In the order dated 17.02.2026 by the authority, the following has been observed: “Madam, CLAIM FOR FAMILY PENSION-LATE SHRI MAYADHAR DEHURY With reference to your claim vide letter dated 02.01.2026 and 10.01.2026 for family pension in respect of Late Shri Mayadhar Dehury, Ex-employee of the Bank, it is informed that the deceased employee had not declared any spouse in his service or pension records nor made any nomination in your favour.
2. In the absence of a specific declaration order of a competent court binding on the Bank, the documents submitted by you do not establish eligibility under the Bank’s Pension Regulation. Accordingly, your request for family pension can not be acceded to.”
4. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner shall approach the competent Court seeking a declaration regarding she being the wife of late Mayadhar Dehury.
It is submitted that the petitioner seeks to withdraw the writ application to approach the competent Court. Memo of date is filed by the learned counsel for the petitioner wherein the following has been stated: “That the petitioner does not want to proceed with the case for which she seeks permission to withdraw the matter for seeking competent Court for declaring her entitlement for pension.” (sic)
Memo shall be taken on record. Scanned copy be updated.
5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of observing that the petitioner shall find her remedy as available under law for redressal of her grievances.
(Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo) Judge Rajesh