IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.5797 of 2025 Nrusingh Charan Mohanty …. Petitioner Mr. S. Roy, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and Others …. Opposite Parties Mr. M.K. Das, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER 25.02.2025 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Considering the nature of order passed under Annexure-14 and on the oral prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, he is permitted to correct the description of O.P. No.2 in Court today. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 4. Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition inter alia with the following prayer:- “It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit the writ petition and issue Rule “Nisi” to the Opposite Parties to show cause as to; (i) why the impugned order dated 27.01.2025 passed by Opp. Party NO.2 under Annexure-14 in the facts and circumstances of the case will not be declared as illegal and as such liable to be set aside (ii) Why the Opposite Parties No.2 & 3 will not be directed to recommend the name of the petitioner to act as Principal-in-Charge of the School within a stipulated time. And if the Opposite Parties do not show cause, then the Rule be made absolute by issuing appropriate writ/writs and any other order as deem fit be passed.” 5. It is contended that in view of the decision taken by the Governing Body of the College in its proceeding dated 13.02.2020 under Annexure-2, O.P. No.4 should not have been allowed to remain as Principal-in-Charge of the College in question in addition to his normal duty. It is accordingly contended that the impugned office order dated 27.01.2025 under Annexure-14 is not sustainable in the eye of law as while passing of such an order, relevancy of the resolution taken by the Governing Body of the College under Annexure-2 has not been taken into consideration at all. 6. Mr. M.K. Das, learned Addl. Standing Counsel on the other hand contended that if the decision taken by the Governing Body has not been taken into consideration by O.P. No.2 while passing the impugned order dated 27.01.2025, let the petitioner bring the same to the notice of O.P. No.2 for consideration and appropriate action. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the submissions made, this Court while disposing the Writ Petition, grants liberty to the petitioner to move O.P. No.2 for cancellation/ recalling of office order dated 27.01.2025 along with the resolution passed by the Governing Body on 13.02.2020 under Annexure-2. It is observed that if any such application is moved along with the resolution, within a period of 2 (two) weeks from the date of receipt of this order, O.P. No.2 shall take a lawful decision on the same within a further period of 2 (two) months. Order passed on 27.01.2025 under Annexure-14 shall be subject to final order to be passed by O.P. No.2 as directed. 8. The Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Basudev Designation: SR. STENO