Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.18450 of 2025 Madhusmita Das ..... Petitioner Represented By Adv. - H.n.tripathy -versus- 1) State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Parties 2) The Engineer In Chief(rw) , Odisha 3) The Executive Engineer Work Division, Cuttack 4) Collector Cum Dist.magistrate, Cuttack Represented By Adv. – Mr.Samaresh Jena, ASC CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 09.07.2025 Order No. 02. 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 Advocate for the State. Perused the Writ Petition as well as the documents annexed thereto. 3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the following prayer: “Therefore, the Petitioner most respectfully prays that Your Lordship would graciously be pleased to admit the case, call for the relevant records and after hearing may be pleased to :- i) direct the Opp.Party No.3 to dispose of the representation of the Petitioner/Annexure-5 in Page 2 of 3. terms of the New Rehabilitation Assistance Amendment Rule, 2025. ii) Direct Opp.Party No.3 to issue appointment order and other consequential benefits in favour of the Petitioner which was extended to other applicants standing in similar footing. iii) And pass any other order/orders, direction/directions as it would be deemed fit and proper to the facts and circumstances of the case in order to provide complete justice to the Petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that the father of the Petitioner, who was working in the Office of the Executive Engineer, Works Department died in harness on 22.06.2002. Thereafter, the Petitioner submitted an application for appointment on compassionate ground on 07.10.2022. Further, learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that till date no final decision has been taken on such application of the Petitioner. Being aggrieved by such inaction on the part of the Opposite Parties, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present Writ Petition. 5. Learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State on the other hand contended that although he has no instruction in the matter, however it is borne out from the record that the Petitioner has submitted his representation before the concerned authority. Therefore, if in the meantime no decision has been taken on the representation of the Petitioner, he will have no objection if this Court directs the Opposite Parties to consider the case of the Petitioner in accordance with law within a stipulated period of time. Page 3 of 3. 6. Having regard to the submissions of the learned counsels for the parties, further taking note of the fact that the Petitioner has already approached Opposite Party No.3 by filing a representation under Annexure-5 to the Writ Petition and in the event such representation has not been disposed of by Opposite Party No.3, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the Writ Petition by directing the Opposite Party No.3 to consider the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-5 strictly in accordance with OCS(RA) Rule, 1990 as well as the Notification of the G.A. & P.G. Department, Government of Odisha within a period of three months from the date of communication of certified copy of this order. The representation of the Petitioner be disposed of by passing a speaking and reasoned order. The final decision so taken by Opposite Party No.3 be communicated to the Petitioner within 10 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 RKS Designation: AR-CUM-Senior Secretary