IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.28393 of 2022 Santosh Kumar Panda …. Petitioner Mr. U.C. Mohanty, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and Others …. Opp. Parties Mr. C.K. Pradhan, AGA Mr. B.B. Swain, Advocate for O.P. Nos.4 and 5 CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No ORDER 05.02.2026 20. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. Pursuant to order dated 20.01.2026, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate produced the instruction provided by the Collector, Jajpur vide his letter dated 29.01.2026. 4. Basing on the instruction so provided, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate contended that by considering the grievance as made in the Writ Petition, petitioner has already been appointed vide office order dated 20.05.2025 and he has also joined in that office on 23.05.2025. 4.1. It is accordingly contended that since grievance as made in the Writ Petition, has already been considered by providing appointment vide order dated 20.05.2025, prayer made in the Writ Petition has become infructuous. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner though does not dispute that petitioner has been appointed vide order dated 20.05.2025, but contended that he should have been appointed from a previous date i.e. from the date private Opp. Party Nos.4 and 5, were so appointed. 6. If that be so, it is open for the petitioner to make a grievance in that regard before the competent authority for consideration of the same in accordance with law. 7. With the aforesaid liberty, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Basudev