p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 8412 of 2024 Kamala Swain ..... Petitioner Mr. M.K. Mohanty, Adv. -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opp. Parties Mr. A. Tripathy, AGA Mr. S.K. Dalai, Adv. for O.P.4 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER 25.06.2026 Order No. 08 I.A. No.5565 of 2026 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that he does not want to press this I.A. 4. Accordingly, the I.A. stands dismissed as not pressed. (BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge 09. W.P.(C) No.8412 of 2024 1. Heard. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties. 3. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer:- p. 2 “The petitioner most respectfully prays that the Hon'ble Court may be graciously pleased to allow the writ petition, issue a writ or direction in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction to the Opp. Parties to pay the contractual dues amounting to Rs. 12,17,885/- for execution of five works along with 01.04.2022 interest @ 9% per annum from and pass such other or further order or orders as are deemed just and proper.” 4. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that even though Petitioner executed five numbers of work in Dihudi pur Gram Panchayat coming under Pattamundai block in the district of Kendrapada and as per the documents available under Annexure-2 & 3, it was found that Petitioner in fact has executed the work and is eligible and entitled to get the bill amount but since the same was not released, the present Writ Petition was filed with the prayer as indicated hereinabove. 4.1.It is contended that since after being communicated with letter dated 10.10.2023 under Annexure-2, Opp. Party No.3 vide his letter dated 13.12.2023 under Annexure-3, came to a finding that Petitioner has executed the work which has been measured and check measured by the Junior Engineer & Assistant Engineer of the Block, there was no occasion not to release the amount so indicated under Annexure-3. 4.2. It is accordingly contended that Opp. Party No.3 be directed to release the bill amount, which has been accepted by him vide Annexure-3 letter dated 13.12.2023. 5. Even though notice of the Writ Petition has been issued since 07.10.2024 but no counter affidavit has been filed by the State. Page 3 of 3 6. Mr. S.K. Dalai, learned counsel appearing for the Opp. Party No.4 on the other hand contended that Petitioner at the relevant time was the Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat and in his capacity as Sarpanch he could not have executed all the works, which is not permissible in the eye of law. 6.1. It is also contended that the works in question were never executed by the Petitioner at any point of time and the measurement and the check measurement has been done at the instance of the Petitioner, without any intimation to the present Sarpanch, who happens to be Opp. Party No.4. 6.2. It is accordingly contended that Petitioner is not eligible to get the amount so claimed. 7. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submission made, this Court while disposing of the Writ Petition directs Opp. Party No.2 to consider the Petitioner’s grievance once again by giving opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner as well as the present Sarpanch-Opp. Party No.4 in accordance with law. 7.1. This Court directs Opp. Party No.2 to take a decision within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of this order. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. (BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge Jyoti