Orissa High Court
WP(C)/11585/2004 of ARABINDA NAYAK Vs STATE on 3 July 2026
of 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.11585 of 2004 Arabinda Nayak …. Petitioner Mr. Sritam Kumar Nayak, Advocate -versus- State of Orissa & others …. Opp. Parties Mr. D.N. Lenka, AGA for OPs No.1 & 2 Mr. A . Swain, Advocate on behalf of Mr. S.B. Jena,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.11585 of 2004
Arabinda Nayak
….
Petitioner
Mr. Sritam Kumar Nayak,
Advocate
-versus-
State of Orissa & others
….
Opp. Parties
Mr. D.N. Lenka, AGA
for OPs No.1 & 2
Mr. A. Swain, Advocate on behalf
of Mr. S.B. Jena, Advocate
for OP No.3
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MRUGANKA SEKHAR SAHOO
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
No.
ORDER
03.07.2026 (Hybrid Mode)
04.
1. The matter was presented before this Court on 16.10.2004 and accordingly, has been listed under the heading ‘Priority 20 Years’.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner unfortunately has passed away.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the opposite party no.3 that nothing survives for adjudication in the present matter and in all likelihood the matter has been rendered infructuous. He files memo of date which is taken on record. Scanned copy be updated. The memo states thus:
“As the petitioner has already been attained the age of superannuation, the matter has already been infructuous. Hence, this amit matter may be disposed of as no cause of action survives.” (sic)
4. Learned counsel Mr. Sritam Kumar Nayak submits that though he is handling the brief of his Late father, but he is not aware of the developments and he shall rely upon the submissions of the learned counsel for the opposite party no.3.
5. Apparently the petitioner was aged about 39 years in the year 2004 would have attained the age of superannuation of 60 years in the year 2025. After the date of superannuation the prayer made in the present writ petition would not survive.
However, the petitioner shall have the liberty to file writ petition afresh for any surviving/continuing cause of action.
6. The writ petition disposed of.
(Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo)
Judge
Digitally Signed Signed by: AMIT KUMAR MOHANTY Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 09-Jul-2026 10:45:30 Signature Not Verified