Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2025 DAILYLAW 228 (ORI)

MAGUNI CHARAN SAMAL v. STATE OF ODISHA

WP(C)/37427/2025 · 2026-01-13

Aditya Kumar Mohapatra

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.37427 of 2025 Maguni Charan Samal ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Sudarsan Behera -versus- 1) State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Parties 2) Director Of Secondary Education, Odisha 3) District Education Officer, Nayagarh Represented by Adv. – Mr. U.C.Jena, A.S.C. CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA Order No. ORDER 13.01.2026 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: “In the above circumstances, it is humbly prayed to this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue notice to the Opp.parties as to why this case shall not be allowed and the Opp.parties shall not be directed for sanction of 3rd RACP in favour of the petitioner for the interest of justice. And may pass any such other order/orders, direction/directions which this Hon'ble court may deem Page 2 of 3. fit and proper.” 4. In course of hearing of the writ application, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner ventilating his grievance has submitted representation before the District Education Officer, Nayagarh, Opposite Party No.3 under Annexure-4. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the said representation is pending as of now. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that a direction be issued to the Opposite Party No.3 to consider the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-4 within a stipulated period of time. 5. Learned Additional Standing Counsel submits that he has no objection if the representation of the Petitioner is considered by the Opposite Party No.3, 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.3 to consider the representation dated 10.08.2025 of the Petitioner under Annexure-4 within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. The Opposite Party No.3 shall do well to dispose of the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-4 by passing a speaking and reasoned order. The decision so taken by the Opposite Party No.3 be also communicated to the Petitioner within ten days thereafter. Page 3 of 3. 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