Page 1 of 2. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No. 14711 of 2019 Aruna Kumar Barik ..... Petitioner Mr. S.K. Singh, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Mr. P.K. Panda, ASC CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER 13.07.2026 Order No. 07 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the Opp. Parties. 3. Petitioner has filed the present writ petition inter alia with the following prayer:- “In view of the above stated facts and circumstances, this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue Rule NISI calling upon the Opp. parties to show cause as to why necessary directions shall not be issued to regularize the service of the Petitioner in the post of Night Watchman-cum-Sweeper or any Class-IV post lying vacant in the office of Sub-Registrar, Simulia in the District of Balasore and grant consequential service benefits keeping in view of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Secretary, State of Karnataka and Others v. Umadevi (3) and others, (2006) 4 SCC 1, And if the Opp. Parties fail to show cause or show insufficient cause this Hon'ble Court may make the said rule absolute by issuing a writ of mandamus directing the Page 2 of 2. Opp. Parties regularize the service of the Petitioner in the post of Night Watchman-cum-Sweeper or any Class-IV post lying vacant in the office of Sub-Registrar, Simulia in the District of Balasore and grant consequential service benefits keeping in view of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Secretary, State of Karnataka and Others v. Umadevi (3) and others, (2006) 4 SCC 1, AND further be pleased to issue any other appropriate writ/writs, rule/rules or order/orders, direction/directions as may be deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice, AND for which act of kindness, the Petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.” 4. However, taking into account the claim raised in the present Writ Petition, liberty is granted to the Petitioner to make a fresh representation before Opp. Party No. 1 by enclosing all the relevant documents and citations in support of his claim, if any, within a period of three (3) weeks hence. 5. It is observed that if such representation is filed within the aforesaid time period, Opp. Party No. 1 shall do well to take a lawful decision on the same within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of such representation. The order so passed by Opp. Party No. 1 be communicated to the Petitioner. 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. (BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge Sneha