Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.36604 of 2025 Ashis Kumar Sahukar ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Bivudatta Chalan -versus- State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv. – U.C. Jena, A.S.C. CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 12.01.2026 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner as well as learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State- Opposite Parties. Perused the writ application as well as the documents annexed thereto. 3. By filing the present writ application, the Petitioner has prayed for the following relief:- “Under the above circumstances it is therefore humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be graciously pleased to quashed the impugned advertisements under Annexure-3(a&b) issued by Opp. Party No.3 and further may be directed the Opposite Parties to consider the representation to absorb the petitioner against the post in which she is continuing. And pass any other appropriate order(s)/direction(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper, the interest Page 2 of 3. of justice, equity and fair play.” 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that the Petitioner who is continuing as a Guest Teacher under the SC & ST Development Department, i.e., the Opposite Party No.2 to the present writ application approached this Court for a direction to the Opposite Party No.3 to take into consideration the experience of the Petitioner while proceeding with the recruitment pursuant to the advertisement under Annexure-3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at this juncture contended that the Petitioner is entitled to get the benefit of his experience at the time of consideration of his case for recruitment. He further submitted that although the Petitioner has ventilated his grievance before the Commissioner- cum-Secretary, School and Mass Education Department, Govt. of Odisha-Opposite Party No.1, however, such representation has not been duly considered. Being aggrieved by such inaction on the part of the Opposite Party No.1, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ application. 5. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that since the Petitioner has already approached the Opposite Party No.1 who is the competent authority to take a decision in the matter and the representation of the Petitioner dated 12.01.2025 is stated to be pending before the Opposite Party No.1, he will have no objection in the event this Court directs the Opposite Party No.1 to take a lawful decision on the representation of the Petitioner within a stipulated period of time. 6. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsels appearing for both sides, on a careful examination of the Page 3 of 3. background facts, further taking into consideration the grievance of the Petitioner, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ application at the stage of admission by directing the Opposite Party No.1 to consider and dispose of the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-7 dated 12.01.2025, if the same is still pending, strictly in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks 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 disposed of by passing a speaking and reasoned order. The final decision so taken by the Opposite Party No.1 be also communicated to the Petitioner within ten days from the date of taking such a decision. 7. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the writ application stands disposed of. 8. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Anil Designation: Junior Stenographer