RANJIT KUMAR SAHU v. STATE OF ODISHA
Court: High Court of Orissa
Bench: MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Orissa judgment dated 2025-12-10. RANJIT KUMAR SAHU v. STATE OF ODISHA. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W. P. (C) No. 35177 of 2025 Ranjit Kumar Sahu …. Petitioner Mr. P. K. Satapathy, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. …. Opposite Parties Mr. M. R. Mohanty, AGA COROM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER 10. 12. 2025 Order No 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for appearing for the Parties. 3. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer:- “The petitioner therefore prays that your Lordships would be graciously pleased to admit this writ petition, call for the records, after hearing the parties issue writ/writs in the nature certiorari/mandamus or any other writ/directions, direct the Collector-cum-Chairman of the DMF, Keonjhar to consider the petitioner's application under annexure-1 for enhancement of remuneration as per Govt notification dated 07. 03.
2024 and annexure-6 pertains to harassment caused to the petitioner by the CEO, DMF, Keonjhar in depriving the petitioner to discharge his duty from 01. 11. 2025. And for this act of kindness the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray. ”. 4. In course of hearing, learned counsel for the Petitioner states that highlighting his grievance, Petitioner has made a representation to Opposite Party No. 3 vide Annexure-6 and the same may be directed to be considered within a stipulated time, to which learned Counsel for the State has no objection. // 2 // 5. As agreed by learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, disposes of the Writ Petition directing Opposite Party No. 3 to consider the representation filed by the Petitioner vide Annexure-6 within a period of four (4) weeks in accordance with law from the date of production of certified copy of this order. 5. 1.
Since it is contended that after such claim being made by the Petitioner for enhancement of the remuneration, Petitioner is not being allowed to discharge his duty w. e. f. 01. 11. 2025 pending a decision as directed, no further coercive action be taken against the Petitioner. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Subrat Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBRAT KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 11-Dec-2025 18:06:01
Source: High Court of Orissa. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.