Page 1 of 4. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.22311 of 2025 Biond Bihari Sahoo ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Sailabala Jena -versus- State Of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv. – Smt. S. Nayak, ASC CORAM: MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 11.05.2026 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 counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ application as well as the documents annexed thereto. 3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the following prayer: “It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Honourable Court may be pleased to give a direction to the direction to the Opp. Parties, particularly to Opp. Party No.l to grant and pay the arrear as per UGC Scale of Pay from 01.01.1986 to 01.01.1996 and for a direction for grant and payment of the Personal Pay of Rs.8000/- Rs. 13500/- equivalent to that of a Lecturer, so also to fix the UGC Scale of Pay by giving benefits of RACP at the grade Pay of Rs 6600/- with arrear within a time stipulated by this Hon'ble Court. This Honourable court may also be pleased to pass Page 2 of 4. any other further order orders as deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 4. The sole grievance of the Petitioner in the present writ petition is that his case has not been considered in terms of the order dated 10.08.2026 passed in W.P.(C) No.24968 of 2023. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that earlier the Petitioner had approached this Court by filing the above noted writ petition. A Coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 10.08.2023, disposed of such writ petition directing the Opposite Parties to extend the benefits to the Petitioner in terms of the judgments passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in General Secretary, Utkal University Demonstrators’ Association decided in O.J.C. Nos.1088 of 2000 and 13156 of 1998. Further, referring to the order passed earlier by the learned Coordinate Bench, learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that the Opposite Parties were directed to extend the benefits in favour of the Petitioner in terms of the above noted judgment without discriminating against the Petitioner and treating the Petitioner to be at par with the demonstrators of Utkal University, who had earlier approached this Court. She further contended that despite such order dated 10.08.2023, the Opposite Parties have considered and rejected the grievance of the Petitioner vide order dated 03.10.2024 at Annexure-2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner assailed the order at Annexure-2 on the ground that the calculations done therein are erroneous and not in terms of the order passed by this Court. In the aforesaid factual backdrop, the Petitioner again approached the Opposite Parties by filing a representation to reconsider her case on 17.04.2025 at Annexure-5 to the writ application. She further submitted that after filing of such representation and taking therein specific grounds, the Opposite Party No.1 has not yet taken any final decision Page 3 of 4. on it. Being aggrieved by such inaction of the Opposite Party No.1, the Petitioner has once again approached this Court by filing the present writ application. 5. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that although he has no specific instruction in the matter, however, in the event the Petitioner approaches the Opposite Party No.1 by filing any such representation dated 17.04.2025, and such representation is still pending for final consideration, he will have no objection in the event this Court directs the Opposite Party No.1 to dispose of the representation of the Petitioner dated 17.04.2025 at Annexure-5 by passing a speaking and reasoned order within a stipulated period of time and strictly in accordance with law. 6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the parties, on a careful examination of the background facts, further keeping in view the principle laid down by this Court in the judgment referred to hereinabove in case of Demonstrators of Utkal University, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ petition at this stage of admission by directing the Opposite Party No.1 to reconsider the case of the Petitioner strictly in terms of the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Division Bench in the above noted case within a period of eight weeks. It is further directed that if required, it is open to the Opposite Party No.1 to review its order dated 03.10.2024, if the necessity so arises, within the aforesaid stipulated period of time. Any order passed by the Opposite Party No.1 be communicated to the Petitioner from time to time. It is further made clear that if the Petitioner has not been extended with the benefit as per the order passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in the case of Utkal University Demonstrators’ Association, then necessary steps be taken Page 4 of 4. for calculation and disbursal of the benefits as expeditiously as possible preferably with four weeks from the date of taking such a decision if there are no other legal impediments. 7. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ application stands disposed of. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. ( A.K. Mohapatra) Judge Sisir Designation: PERSONAL ASSISTANT