Page 1 of 2. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No. 26545 of 2022 Madhusudan Mishra ..... Petitioner Mr. S. Mallik, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Mr. S.P. Das, ASC CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER 09.02.2026 Order No. 07 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard Mr. S. Mallik, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Mr. S.P. Das, learned Addl. Standing Counsel appearing for the Opp. Parties. 3. The present writ petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer:- “On the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to: (i) Direct/order that the petitioner shall be brought over to regular establishment as a Junior Engineer w.e.f. 2.8.2001 on completion of 10 years of service in terms of the Resolution dt. 15.05.1997 as at Annexure-3 with all consequential service and monetary benefits (ii) Direct/order that the petitioner shall be paid remuneration @ Rs.5,000/- p.m. w.e.f. 1.1.1996 and Rs.13,500/- w.e.f. 1.1.2006 being the minimum initial pay of the post of Junior Engineer as the petitioner was holding the post of Junior Engineer on contractual basis. (iii) Direct/order that the differential arrear dues shall be paid within a stipulated period with admissible interest thereon. Page 2 of 2. (iv) Pass such other orders/direction as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice. And for this act of kindness, the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.” 4. It is contended that on the face of the order passed by the Tribunal under Annexure-9, claim of the Petitioner has not yet been considered and disposed of in accordance with law. It is accordingly contended that liberty be given to the Petitioner to move Opp. Party No. 1 for consideration of his grievance in terms of the order passed by the Tribunal under Annexure-9. 5. Learned Addl. Standing Counsel on the other hand contended that pursuant to the order passed by the Tribunal, office order dtd.24.09.2021 under Annexure-11 has been passed. 6. Be that as it may, considering the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner, he is permitted to move a fresh application before Opp. Party No. 1 for consideration of his grievance as made in the writ petition. 6.1. It is observed that if any such application is moved before Opp. Party No. 1within a period of three (3) weeks hence, the said authority shall do well to take a lawful decision on the same within a further period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of such application. 7. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. (BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge Sneha