Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.6377 of 2025 Gajendra Mohanty ..... Petitioner Represented By Adv. – Mr. Amiya Kumar Chhatoi -versus- State Of Odisha and another ..... Opposite Parties Represented By Adv. – Mr. M.R. Mohanty, AGA CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 06.03.2025 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ petition as well as the documents annexed thereto. 3. The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner with the following prayers:- “In view of above facts and circumstances stated above, it is ardently prayed that this Hon'ble Court be graciously pleased to direct the Opp. Parties to sanction annual periodical increments from the year 2022 onwards in favour of the petitioner, And The Hon'ble Court further be please to direct the Opp. Parties to disburse the differential arrear accrued thereon in his favour within the time Page 2 of 3. stipulated by Hon'ble Court. And the Hon'ble Court be please to issue any other appropriate writ/writs, order/ orders, direction/directions as deem fit and proper in the fitness of the case.” 4. Being aggrieved by non-sanction of his annual increments from the year 2022, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition. 5. Referring to the relevant rules of the Orissa Service Code, learned counsel for the Petitioner stated before this Court that the Petitioner is entitled to annual periodical increments, however, the Opposite Parties have not considered the same. He further contended that being aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the Opposite Parties, the Petitioner had earlier approached the Opposite Party No.2, i.e. Director of Horticulture, Odisha, Bhubaneswar, by filing representation on 01.01.2025. However, no decision has been taken on the same as of now. 6. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, contended that on perusal of the writ petition, it appears that the Petitioner has already been approached the Opposite Party No.2 by submitting a representation. He further contended that in the event such representation is still pending and no decision has been taken, he will have no objection in the event this Court directs the Opposite Party No.2 to take a decision on the same in accordance with law Page 3 of 3. as well as rules within a stipulated period of time. 7. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties and on a careful examination of the background facts and further keeping in view the limited nature of grievance, this Court disposes of the writ petition at the stage of admission by directing the Opposite Party No.2 to consider the representation of the Petitioner dated 01.01.2025 under Annexure-13, if the same is still pending, within a period of two months from the date of communication of a certified copy of this order by the Petitioner. It is needless to mention here that the representation of the Petitioner shall be considered and disposed of by passing a speaking and reasoned order. Final decision so taken on the said representation shall be communicated to the Petitioner within ten days thereafter. ( A.K. Mohapatra) Judge Debasis Designation: SECRETARY