Page 1 of 4. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.911 of 2025 Lenin Kumar Sahu ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Asish Kumar Ray -versus- State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv. – D.K. Sahoo, A.G.A. CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 13.01.2026 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 Additional Govt. 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. No.2 to dispose of the representation of the petitioner /Annexure 6 in terms of the Judgment dated 25.09.2023 passed by Honorable High Court in the case of State of Odisha and others vrs Bindusagar Samantaray in W.A No.810 of 2021 and batch of cases. Page 2 of 4. (ii) Direct Opp.party No.2 to issue appointment order and other consequential benefits in favor 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 died in harness on 22.03.2018 while he was in government service. Thereafter, the Petitioner submitted an application for appointment on compassionate ground on 11.08.2018 under the OCS (RA) Rules, 1990. Further, learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that the Petitioner again approached before the Director Higher Education, Odisha, Bhubaneswar-Opposite Party No.2 on 15.01.2024 under Annexure-6 by filing a representation. He further 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. In the aforesaid context, learned counsel for the Petitioner referred to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Malaya Nanda Sethy vrs. State of Orissa and others : reported in 2022(II) OLR(SC)-1 decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the judgment of this Court in Suchitra Bal vs. State of Odisha & ors. by a Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No.2081 of 2021 decided on 16.03.2023 as well as Bindusagar Samantaray vs. State of Odisha & ors. by a Division Bench of this Court in Page 3 of 4. W.A. No.810 of 2021 decided on 25.09.2023 and the judgment of this Court in Biswajit Swain vs. State of Odisha and others in W.P.(C) No.5214 of 2021 decided on 31.10.2023. He further referred to the notification of the G.A. & P.G. Dept. dated 04.04.2025 and contended that in the meantime the law has been changed and the application of the Petitioner should have been considered under the old Rules of the year 1990. 6. Learned Additional Govt. Advocate 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 application before the concerned authority. Therefore, if in the meantime no decision has been taken on the application 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. 7. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties, on a careful examination of the background facts, further taking note of the date of death of the ex-govt. employee, further taking note of the fact that the Petitioner has applied for rehabilitation appointment before the OCS (RA) Rules, 2020 came into force, this Court is of the view that the case of the Petitioner is covered under the OCS(RA) Rules, 1990. Further, it appears that the Petitioner submitted a representation before Opposite Party No.2 under Annexure-6 to the Writ Petition and in the event such application has not been disposed of by Opposite Party No.2, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the Writ Petition by directing the Opposite Party No.2 to consider the rehabilitation application Page 4 of 4. of the Petitioner under Annexure-4 and the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-6, strictly in accordance with OCS(RA) Rule, 1990 as well as the Notification of the G.A. & P.G. Department, Government of Odisha dated 04.04.2025 and keeping in view the aforesaid judgments relied upon by the Petitioner, and dispose of the same within a period of three months from the date of communication of certified copy of this order by passing a speaking and reasoned order. The final decision so taken by Opposite Party No.2 be communicated to the Petitioner within 10 days thereafter. 8. With the aforesaid observation, the writ application stands disposed of. 9. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Anil Designation: Junior Stenographer