Page 1 of 4. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.2535 of 2026 Balaram Das ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. – Mr. Rajkishore Swain -versus- State of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv. – Mr. S.K. Parhi, ASC CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 28.01.2026 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. On the request of the learned counsel for the Petitioner, he is permitted to add the CDPO, Niali as Opposite Party No.7 to the writ petition. 3. Let the corrected copy of the cause title of the writ petition be uploaded/filed by tomorrow. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ petition as well as the documents annexed thereto. 5. The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with Page 2 of 4. the following prayer: “It is, therefore prayed that, this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit the writ petition issue rule NISI in the nature of a writ of certiorari/mandamus directing the Opp. party No.6, Head Master, Pahanga Nodal High School to allow the petitioner to rejoin his engagement as watchman forthwith at Pahanga Nodal High School and quash the order of engagement issued by the opp. party no.1 under annexure-6. AND, Direct the opp. parties release the petitioner's withheld salary from March 2025 till Fifth June along with interest. And issue any other order/orders, direction/directions, writ/writs as this Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper giving complete Justice to the petitioner.” 6. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at the outset, contended that being aggrieved the conduct of the Opposite Party No.6-The Headmaster, Pahanga Nodal High School, Pahanga, District-Cuttack, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submitted that although the Petitioner has been working in the said school on being engaged by the Self Help Group (SHG) and in the presence of any specific allegation against the present Petitioner, the Headmaster of the School is trying to throw out the Petitioner by disengaging him from service and trying to engage another person. In course of argument, learned counsel for the Petitioner also referred to the advertisement at Annexure-6 dated 02.01.2026 Page 3 of 4. issued by the CDPO, Niali, Opposite Party No.7. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid illegal and arbitrary conduct of the Opposite Parties No.6 & 7, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition. 7. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, contended that the grievance of the Petitioner can very well be redressed by the CDPO, Niali. However, the Petitioner is not approached the Opposite Party No.7 for redressal of his grievance. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the State contended that in the event the grievance of the Petitioner is still subsists, he has no objection in the event this Court directs the Petitioner to approach the Opposite No.7 by filing a detailed representation with a corresponding direction to the Opposite Party No.7 to consider and dispose of the grievance of the Petitioner strictly in accordance with law and the applicable rules/guidelines within a stipulated period of time. 8. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for both the sides and on a careful examination of the background facts as well as the materials on record, further taking note of the grievance of the Petitioner as involved in the present writ petition, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ petition at the stage of admission by granting liberty to the Petitioner to approach the Opposite Party No.7-CDPO, Niali by filing a detailed representation taking therein all the grounds within ten days from today. In such eventuality, the Page 4 of 4. Opposite Party No.7 shall consider and dispose the grievance of the Petitioner by passing necessary orders in accordance with rules and guidelines within a period of four weeks from the date of filing of such representation. It is further directed that till disposal of the representation of the Petitioner by the Opposite Party No.7 or for a period of six weeks, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the Petitioner. 9. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Debasis