JUDGMENT : I. Mahanty, J. - The Petitioner-Gsyasuddin Khan @ Gyasuddin Khan in the present writ application has sought to challenge the orders dated 13.4.2009 as well as 14, 5.2009 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Bhubaneswar In CMC No. 61 of 2004 under Annexure-1 series in which the present Opposite Parties-Mrs. Kahkashan Khan and her son Asad Khan were Petitioners. They had filed a petition u/s 125 Code of Criminal Procedure which came to disposed of on contest and the present opposite parties 1 and 2 were granted a sum of Rs.15Q0/- each as maintenance (total Rs.3000/- per month) from the date of application. 2. The Petitioner had sought to challenge the final order of maintenance before this Court in Crl. Revision No. 751 of 2006 which was ultimately dismissed on 3.2.2009. After dismissal of the criminal revision as noted hereinabove, it appears that the opposite party filed a petition before the learned S.D.J.M, seeking attachment of the salary of the present Petitioner towards realization of unpaid maintenance dues. Vide order dated 3.3.2009, it was noted therein that though a copy of the petition was offered to the learned Counsel appearirg for the present Petitioner (O.P. No, in the Court below) since the learned Counsel refused to receive the same, the Drawing and Disbursement Officer of the establishment where the Petitioner was working was called upon to provide the pay particulars within two weeks from the date of the order. Thereafter, by order dated 13.4.2009, it appears that the present opposite party had filed an application with a prayer for realization of the arrear as well a the running maintenance duesfrom the Petitioner and such an application though served on the learned Counsel for the present Petitioner since he refused to accept the same, direction was issued to the Divisional Manager of the Company where the Petitioner was working, to deduct an amount of Rs.3000/- per month as current maintenance dues and to make necessary arrangement' for deposit of the same in the account of the opposite party from the date of dismissal of the revision by this Court, i.e. from 3.2.2009. In the said order, it is further noted that the order relating to the arrear dues would be determined after hearing both the parties so also about the mode of payment. 3. In the said order, it is further noted that the order relating to the arrear dues would be determined after hearing both the parties so also about the mode of payment. 3. Thereafter, by order dated 14.5.2009 although the learned S.D.J.M. took note of various claim for the amount outstanding claimed by the parties, he directed that the disputed amount would be decided after full hearing of the matter as both the parties wanted to cite the legal provision in this regard. In the self-same order, the present Petitioner had filed a petition to recall the order dated 13.4.2009 on the ground that he wanted to pay the maintenance dues before the Court in every month. The learned S.D.J.M. dismissed the prayer of the Petitioner to recall the order dated 13.4, 2009 on the ground that it was not competent to recall its own order. Therefore, in the light of the aforesaid facts, the Petitioner herein has sought to challenge the order dated 13.4.2009 directing the Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Company to deduct Rs.3000/- per month and to make necessary arrangement for depositiag of the same in the account of the Opposite Party No. 1, as well as the order dated 14.5.2009 by which, the present Petitioner prayed to recall the order ated 13.4.2009, was rejected. 4. Mr. Mishra, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner asserts that since the Petitioner is ready and willing to make payment of maintenance amount of Rs.3000/- per month directly to the Opposite Party No. 1, their was no necessity or lawful requirement to direct payment by way of attachment of the Petitioner's salary. 5. Opposite Party No. 1 appeared in person and stated that she and her son have only received a very meager amount of money as maintenance and the Petitioner has been litigating at various forums resulting in mounting huge arrears of maintenance being receivable by the Opposite Parties. Apart from the same, the opposite party states that while the Petitioner has not been regular in making the payment of even the current months dues and that there is considerable delay for effecting withdrawal of the money from the Court. Apart from the same, the opposite party states that while the Petitioner has not been regular in making the payment of even the current months dues and that there is considerable delay for effecting withdrawal of the money from the Court. She further states that if the Petitioner is ready and willing to pay the opposite parties Rs.3000/- per month for maintenance, the Petitioner should have no objection if the said amount is deducted from his salary and the same is sent to her bank account, so that she can utilize the same for maintenance as well as the educational needs of her son. 6. Although the learned Counsel for the Petitioner as well as opposite party No. 1 made various affidavit as well as statements of the actual outstanding due as on date, since I find from the impugned order that the learned S.D.J.M. has not yet dealt with the calculation of arrears and has further directed that determination would be made, after full hearing of the matter, I do not propose to deal with the same herein and leave it to the discretion of the learned S.D.J.M. to adjudicate the same at an early date, preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. 7. Vis-a-vis the subject matter of the present challenge i.e. direction to the employer of the Petitioner to deduct Rs. 30007- per month and to also make necessary arrangement for depositing the same in the amount of the Petitioner-Kahkashan Khan is concerned, since the Petitioner-Gayasuddin Khan is ready and willing to effect the aforesaid payment every months since 3.2.2009, 1 am of the considered view that the direction contained in the order dated 13.4.2009 be modified to the following extent. The Petitioner-Gayasuddin Khan will issue a standing order/instruction to his bankers to transfer a sum of Rs.3000/- per month from his bank account to the bank account of Opposite Party No. 1 -Kahkashan Khan in the State Bank of India, KITT Branch, Chandrasekharpur, Patia vide account No. 30219376870. This order will operate w.e.f. 3.2.2009 onwards (after deducting therefrom any maintenance paid by the Petitioner to the opposite party either directly or through the Court for this period. This order will operate w.e.f. 3.2.2009 onwards (after deducting therefrom any maintenance paid by the Petitioner to the opposite party either directly or through the Court for this period. The aforesaid direction will continue and shall be subject to any modification made by the learned S.D.J.M., Bhubaneswar while finally determining the arrear outstanding i.e. the amount due prior to 3.2.2009 and any further direction that the learned S.D.J.M. may pass thereon. 8. The writ petition is disposed of with the modification of the impugned order dated 13.4.2009 to the aforesaid effect and the Petitioner is directed to issue necessary standing order/direction (To See the View Please Click Here) his bankers within one week from today, with a copy being sent by registered post with A.D. to Opposite Party No. 1.