IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C ) No.6837 of 2022 Manoranjan Samantaray & Another …. Petitioners Dr. B.K. Mishra, Adv. -versus- State of Odisha & Others …. Opposite Parties Mr. S.P. Das, ASC Mr. B.S. Tripathy, Sr. Adv. along with Mr. A. Tripathy, Adv. (for O.P. Nos.4 to 13) COROM: THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No ORDER 27.01.2026 23. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode. 2. Pursuant to order dt.04.12.2025, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners filed the initial order of engagement of Petitioners by way of a memo. The same be kept in record. 3. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 4. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer: It is therefore prayed that Your Lordships would be graciously pleased to admit this writ petition, Call for the records and Issue RULE NISI calling upon the Opp. par-ties to show cause as to why: 1. The Seniority list as prepared in pursuant to the recruitment notification of 1991 against the vacancies requisitioned for in the year 1990 shall not be maintain determining inter-se seniority for promotions. 2. The employees brought into the cadre after 1991 (through recruitment under RA Scheme) shall not be notionally placed below those directly recruited in pursuant to the recruitment notification of 1991 (against the vacancies requisitioned on 15th September 1990); 3. The illegal gradation list of the Desk Officers (Annexure-1) shall not be modified in the light of the Gradation lists for Section Officers (Annexure-13) and for the Senior Private Secretary (Annexure-14) And pass any other appropriate order/orders. Writ/writs, direction/directions as this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the interest of justice, And for this act of kindness the Petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray. 5. It is contended that without considering the objection filed by the Petitioner to the provisional Gradation list of Desk Officer (Group-B) in OSS cadre, when the Final Gradation list under Annexure-1 was published, the present Writ Petition was filed with the prayer as indicated hereinabove. 6. Learned Addl. Standing Counsel on the other hand contended that the present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia seeking modification of the Gradation list of the Desk Officers so issued under Annexure-1, in the light of the Gradation list published for Section Officers under Annexure-13 and for the post of Sr. Private Secretary under Annexure-14. It is however contended that since the Gradation list of Desk Officers under Annexure-1 is not under challenge and Petitioners seek only its modification taking into account the Gradation list issued under Annexures-13 & 14, the Writ Petition with the nature of prayer, is not entertainable. It is also contended that no such application has been made by the Petitioners seeking modification of their position in the Gradation list of Desk Officers, in the light of the Gradation list published under Annexures-13 & 14. 7. To the submission made by the learned Addl. Standing Counsel, Mr. B.K. Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner made further submission contending inter alia that Annexures-13 & 14 Gradation list have been issued in respect of the post of Section Officer and Sr. Private Secretary, relying on the Rules governing the field. But while issuing the Gradation list of Desk Officers, the aforesaid Rule was never followed. 8. Mr. B.S. Tripathy, learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the private opp. parties also made similar submission as made by the learned Addl. Standing Counsel, contending inter alia that Petitioners’ grievance as made in the Writ Petition, was never made before the authority and prior to consideration of the same, the present Writ Petition was filed. It is also contended that final Gradation list of Desk Officers has been rightly issued by maintaining the position of the Petitioners vis-à-vis the private Opp. Parties. 9. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, considering the submission made and the prayer involved, this Court while disposing the Writ Petition permits the Petitioners to make appropriate application for consideration of their grievance as made in the Writ Petition, with regard to their placement in the Final Gradation list of Desk Officers before Opp. Party No.1. 9.1. It is observed that if such a representation is filed by the Petitioners within a period of 3(three) weeks hence, 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. Parties be communicated to one of the Petitioners. 9.2. It is further observed that while taking such a decision, Petitioners as well as private Opp. Parties be given due opportunity of hearing. 10. The Writ Petition accordingly stands disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge sangita