Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.7099 of 2026 Sanjay Kumar Samal ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. – Mr. Sameer Kumar Das -versus- State of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv. – Mr. U.C. Jena, ASC CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 09.03.2026 Order No. 01. 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 petition as well as the documents annexed thereto. 3. The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner with the following prayers:- “Under the above circumstances, it is therefore humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court be graciously pleased to direct the Opp. Parties to allow him to work and to pay the arrear salaries of the petitioner from December, 2002 till date and also the current salary with periodical increments and other benefits with accrued interest @ 7% per annum within a stipulated period as deem fit and proper; Page 2 of 3. And/or the Hon'ble Court be please to issue any other appropriate writ/writs, direction/directions, order/orders in the fitness of the case to give complete justice to the petitioner.” 4. It is stated by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that ventilating his grievance, the Petitioner has already approached the Opposite Party No.1-Commissioner-cum-Secretry in School and Mass Education Department, Lok Seva Bhawan, Bhubaneswar by filing a detailed representation dated 16.09.2025 at Annexure-5 to the writ petition. The sole grievance of the Petitioner in the present writ petition is the inaction of the Opposite Party No.1 in redressing the grievance of the Petitioner by disposing of the representation of the Petitioner at Annexure-5. Being aggrieved by such inaction of the Opposite Party No.1, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition. 5. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, contended that although he has no specific instruction in the matter, however, taking into consideration the fact that the Petitioner has already approached the Opposite Party No.1 for redressal of his grievance and that the representation filed by the Petitioner at Annexure-5 is stated to be pending before the Opposite Party No.1, he will have no objection in the event this Court directs the Opposite Party No.1 to consider and dispose of the representation of the Petitioner strictly in accordance with law and applicable rules within a stipulated period of time. 6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel Page 3 of 3. for both the sides, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, disposes of the writ petition by directing the Opposite Party No.1 to consider the representation of the Petitioner dated 16.09.2025 at Annexure-5 in accordance with law and applicable rules within a period of six weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. It is needless to mention here that the representation of the Petitioner shall be considered and disposed of by passing a speaking and reasoned order. Any decision so taken on the said representation shall be communicated to the Petitioner within ten days thereafter. (Aditya Kumar Mohapatra ) Judge Debasis