BASANTA KUMAR PRADHAN v. STATE OF ODISHA
Court: High Court of Orissa
Bench: MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Orissa judgment dated 2026-04-09. BASANTA KUMAR PRADHAN v. STATE OF ODISHA. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No. 10687 of 2026 Sri Basanta Kumar Pradhan ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Kunal Kumar Swain -versus- State Of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties Mr. S. Behera, AGA CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 09. 04. 2026 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ application as well as the documents annexed thereto. 3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the following prayer: “Under the above circumstances, it is humbly prayed that the writ petition may be allowed; And (A) a writ of mandamus or an appropriate writ may be issued directing the opposite parties more particularly to the Director, Secondary Education, Odisha, Bhubaneswar opposite party No. 2 and the District Education Officer, Deogarh opposite party No.
3 to approve the appointment of the petitioner against the post of Physical Page 1 of 3. Education Teacher in Panchayat High School, Gurusang in the district of Deogarh and all consequential benefits including his monthly salary may be released in his favour, within a time to be stipulated by this Hon'ble Court as the dispute / controversy between the petitioner and Sri Kiran Kumar Pradhan for the post of Physical Education Teacher has already been over and Sri Kiran Kumar Pradhan has been found ineligible for the post of Physical Education Teacher and he has already left the School without making any further claim; (B) And any other order / orders or direction / directions may be issued so as to give complete relief to the petitioner;” 4. In course of hearing of the writ application, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner ventilating his grievance has submitted representation before the Opposite Party No. 2 under Annexure-7.
It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the said representation is pending as of now. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that a direction be issued to the Opposite Party No. 2 to consider the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-7 within a stipulated period of time. 5. Learned counsel for the State submits that he has no objection if the representation of the Petitioner is considered by the Opposite Party No. 2, which is stated to be pending, in accordance with law within a stipulated period of time. 6. Considering the limited nature of grievance of the Petitioner, the writ application is disposed of at the stage of admission with a Page 2 of 3. direction to the Opposite Party No. 2 to consider the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-7 within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. The Opposite Party No.
2 shall do well to dispose of the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-7 by passing a speaking and reasoned order. The decision so taken by the Opposite Party No. 2 be also communicated to the Petitioner within two weeks thereafter. 7. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ application stands disposed of. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. ( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra ) Judge S. K. Rout Page 3 of 3.
Source: High Court of Orissa. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.