Page 1 of 2. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.14805of 2025 Sunanda Kishore Padhi ..... Petitioner Ms. Deepali Mahapatra, Advocate -versus- Union of India & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Mr. S. Mohanty, ASC, Mr. L.K. Maharana, Advocate, (O.P. Nos.2 to 4) CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER 23.05.2025 Order No.01 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. On the oral prayer made by Ms. Deepali Mahapatra, learned counsel for the Petitioner, she is permitted to correct the description of Opposite Party No.5 in Court. 3. Heard Ms. Deepali Mahapatra, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. Gochhayat, learned Central Government Counsel along with Mr. P.K. Parhi, learned D.S.G.I. appearing for the Opposite Parties. 4. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia challenging the order of transfer passed vide office order dated 04.04.2025 under Annexure-5. By the said order, Petitioner has been put under transfer from NALCO, Angul to Raigad, Chhattisgarh, Central. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that seeking cancellation of the order of transfer, Petitioner moved an application under Annexure-6 before Opposite Party No.5 and as per the instruction available with her, the said representation has Page 2 of 2. been duly forwarded to Opposite Party No.2 in the meantime, on 22nd May 2023. It is accordingly contended that appropriate direction be issued to Opposite Party No.2 to take final decision on the Petitioner’s application under Annexure-6, so forwarded and till a decision is taken, Petitioner’s interest be protected. 6. Learned Central Government Counsel raised objection to such prayer of the Petitioner and contended that it is a case of transfer and Petitioner has been put under transfer after about three years of his continuance at Angul. It is also contended that when preference was called for, Petitioner while making the application, has given Raigad as his 3rd preference, over and above, Jamshedpur, Jharkhand as 1st preference and Koderma, Jharkhand as 2nd preference. It is accordingly contended that since Petitioner has been put under transfer to Raigad taking into account his preference, no interference is called for. 7. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made and the fact that Petitioner’s representation for cancellation of transfer under Annexure-6 as contended is pending before Opposite Party No.2 since 22.05.2025, this Court while disposing the Writ Petition, directs the Opposite Party No.2 to take a lawful decision on the same; taking into account the grounds taken in the representation. Opposite Party No.2 is directed to take a decision within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Till a decision is taken, as directed, status-quo with regard to continuance of the Petitioner be maintained. 8. The writ petition stands disposed of. (BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Vacation Judge Narayan