Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2025 DAILYLAW 73875 (ORI)

LAXMI KANTA PATTANAYAK v. STATE OF ODISHA

WP(C)/30522/2025 · 2025-10-30

Dixit K S

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.30522 of 2025 Sri Laxmi Kanta Pattanayak …. Petitioner Mr. G. Sethi, Advocate -Versus- State of Odisha & Others …. Opposite Parties Mr. S.K. Jee, AGA CORAM: JUSTICE DIXIT KRISHNA SHRIPAD Order No. 01. ORDER 30.10.2025 1. Petitioner is grieving before the Writ Court against non- consideration of his request for antedating his date of regularization at par with rest of the people in the light of a Coordinate Bench decision in W.P.(C) (OAC) No.1074 of 2017 disposed of on 07.10.2021. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the Coordinate Bench order was taken in Writ Appeal No.936 of 2021 and the Division Bench of this Court negatived the challenge and that in SLP No.24479 of 2023 along with connected SLPs further challenge came to be rejected by the Apex Court vide order dated 06.05.2025. Counsel submits, though all this has happened the benefit of antedating with effect from the date of entry into service has not been granted after regularization. 3. Learned AGA appearing for the respondent opposes the petition contending that a writ of mandamus has to be preceded by demand & rejection and that having not happened in this matter petitioner should be relegated to make an appropriate application to the concerned in the light of decisions referred to above. He also assures the Court that should such a representation be made, the same would be considered within a reasonable period in accordance with law. This should satisfy the petitioner. In the above circumstances, petition is disposed off reserving liberty to the petitioner to make an appropriate representation in the light of the decisions cited above within two weeks and if such a representation is made, the same shall be considered by the answering respondents within a period of eight (8) weeks next following. All contentions in this regard are kept open. It is open to the answering opposite parties to solicit any information or documents from the side of the petitioner, as required for taking a decision on the subject representation. However, in that guise delay shall not be brooked. Now, no costs. ( Dixit Krishna Shripad ) Judge Madhusmita Designation: Jr. Stenographer