Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.37300 of 2025 Pramila Parida ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Chandiprasad Sahani -versus- State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv. - Mr. U.C.Jena, A.S.C. CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA Order No. ORDER 25.02.2026 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ application as well as the prayer made therein. 3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the following prayer: “The petitioner therefore humbly prays that your Lordship would graciously be pleased to : (i) Admit the Writ Petition, (ii) Call for the relevant records. AND (iii) After hearing the counsels for the parties further be pleased to direct the 0pp. Parties to regularize the service of the petitioner with effect from March, 2020 and grant all consequential service benefits. And any other order/ orders or direction/ directions Page 2 of 3. may be issued so as to give complete relief to the petitioner.” 4. It is stated by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that, claiming regularisation of his service, the Petitioner has already approached Opposite Party No.1 by filing a detailed representation dated 09.01.2025 at Anenxure-6 to the present writ application. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at this juncture contended that the case of the Petitioner is squarely covered by the ratio laid down by this Court in Balabhadra Majhi vs. State of Odisha in W.P.(C) No.15345 of 2022 disposed of vide judgment dated 11.11.2022. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that the Opposite Parties be directed to regularise the services of the Petitioner by applying the aforesaid ratio laid down by this Court in respect of Assistant Primary School Teachers, Level-IV. 5. Learned Additional Standing Counsel submits that he has no objection if the representation of the Petitioner is considered by the Opposite Party No.1, which is stated to be pending, in accordance with law within a stipulated period of time. 6. Considering the limited nature of grievance of the Petitioner, the writ application is disposed of at the stage of admission with a direction to the Opposite Party No.1 to consider and dispose of the representation of the Petitioner dated 09.01.2025 under Annexure-6 keeping in view the judgment in Balabhadra Majhi’s case (supra) within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. The Page 3 of 3. Opposite Party No.1 shall do well to dispose of the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-6 by passing a speaking and reasoned order. The decision so taken by the Opposite Party No.1 be also communicated to the Petitioner within ten days thereafter. 7. With the aforesaid observation, the writ application stands disposed of. 8. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Rubi