p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WPC No.7657 of 2026 Dasarathi Nayak …. Petitioner Mr. K.K. Swain, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & others …. Opp. Parties Mr. C.M Singh, ASC CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA Order No. ORDER 12.03.2026 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 Standing Counsel for the State- Opposite Parties. Perused the writ application as well as the prayer made therein. 3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the following prayer: “xxx xxx xxx A. a writ of mandamus or an appropriate writ may be issued directing the opposite parties more particularly to the opposite party no.2 to declare the petitioner as senior to opposite party no.3 and the deemed date of joining/date of joining of the p. 2 opposite party no.3 may be changed/modified from 01.06.1995 to 25.10.1995 as he has joined as Lecturer in History subsequent to grant of temporary recognition to the College in question, within a time to be stipulated by this Hon’ble Court. xxx xxx xxx” 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that being aggrieved by the conduct of the Opposite Parties in not declaring the Petitioner’s seniority to Opposite Party No.3 who joined as Lecturer in History on 25.10.1995 whereas the Petitioner joined as a Lecturer in Economics prior to Opposite Party No.3 i.e. on 01.10.1994, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ application. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submitted that although the Petitioner has approached the Director, Higher Education, Opposite Party No.2, by filing a detailed representation ventilating the grievance on 15.07.2025 at Annexure-10 to the writ application, however no decision has been taken on the said representation. Being aggrieved by such inaction of the Opposite Party No.2, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ application. 6. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, contended that the inter se dispute between the Petitioner and the private Opposite Party No.3 is with regard to the seniority in service. He further submitted that in the event the representation of the Petitioner dated 15.07.2025 at Annexure-10 is still pending, p. 3 Opposite Party No.2 shall consider such representation by providing an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner as well as Opposite Party No.3 and dispose of the same in accordance with law within a stipulated period of time. 7. Keeping in view the rival facts and the backgrounds and further taking into consideration the inter se dispute involved in the writ application, this Court disposes of the writ application at the stage of admission directing the Opposite Party No.2 to consider the representation of the Petitioner dated 15.07.2025 at Annexure-10 after providing opportunity of hearing to both the Petitioner and the Opposite Party No.3. Opposite Party No.2 shall do well to consider the application of the Petitioner in accordance with the applicable law and the rules as well as the letter at Annexure-9 to the writ petition and dispose of the representation of the Petitioner by passing a detailed speaking order within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of a copy of this order. The final decision so taken be communicated to the petitioner within ten days thereafter. 8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ application stands disposed of. (Aditya Kumar Mohapatra) Judge Pradeep