Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2025 DAILYLAW 76554 (ORI)

DHIROJ KUMAR TRIPATHY v. STATE OF ODISHA

WP(C)/33248/2025 · 2025-11-26

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.33248 of 2025 Dhiroj Kumar Tripathy …. Petitioner Mr. J.R. Khuntia, Advocate -Versus- State of Odisha & Others …. Opposite Parties Mr. J.K. Khandayatray, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE DIXIT KRISHNA SHRIPAD Order No. 01. ORDER 26.11.2025 Petitioner has structured his prayer as under: “Under the above circumstances, it is humbly prayed that the writ petition may be allowed; And (A) a writ of mandamus or an appropriate writ may be issued commanding the opposite parties more particularly to the opposite party No.l and 2 to extend the benefit of Lecturer (Group-A) Scale and Reader (State Scale) to the petitioner with effect from 18.10.2012 and 18.10.2022 respectively in terms of the Odisha Non- Government Aided College Lecturer's Placement Rules, 2014 under Annexure:7 read with the clarificatory order dated 20.01.2016 issued by the Government of Odisha in Higher Education Department, Bhubaneswar under Annexure:8 as per the ratio decided by this Hon'ble Court in the case of Lokanath Behera Vs. State of Odisha and others (W.P.(C) No.2062 of 2024 disposed of on 13.08.2025), within a time to be stipulated by this Hon'ble Court.; (B) And any other order / orders or direction / directions may be issued so as to give complete relief to the petitioner;” 2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, drawing attention of the Court to his client’s representation dated 22.08.2025 at Annexure-9 submits that his client would be satisfied if a direction is given to consider the said representation in a time bound way keeping in view the law declared by this Court in W.P.(C) No.2062 of 2024 between Lokanath Behera v. State of Odisha disposed of on 13.08.2025. 3. Learned ASC very fairly agrees that the subject representation should meet its fate at the hands of OP No.1 and he would ensure that would happen. With this proposal, counsel for the Petitioner is agreeable. In the above circumstances, writ petition is disposed off. Time for compliance is eight weeks which would include communicating the decision taken on the subject representation to the Petitioner. All contentions are kept open. It hardly needs to be stated that the consideration has to happen keeping in view the law declared by this Court in Loknath Behera (supra). 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. Web copy of order to be acted upon by all concerned. ( Dixit Krishna Shripad ) Judge Madhusmita Designation: Jr. Stenographer