Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.7518 of 2026 Sri Hadibandhu Rout and others ..... Petitioners Represented by Adv. - Kunal Kumar Swain -versus- State Of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties Mr. C.M. Singh, ASC CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 12.03.2026 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners as well as learned counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ application as well as the documents annexed thereto. 3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the following prayer: “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 directing the opposite parties to sanction annual increments in favour of the petitioners from 2013 onwards i.e. from 1st July of each and Page 2 of 3. every year instead of 1st January of every year as similarly situated teachers of Ranpur Block in the district of Nayagarh, who were allowed RACP with effect from 1st January, 2013 and their annual increments were changed from 1 July to 1st January of every year, subsequently the same was corrected by the Block Education Officer, Ranpur vide his office order No.425 dated 15.04.2021 under Annexure:3 series by allowing them to avail annual increments from 1st July, 2013 onwards instead of 1st January' 2013, 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 petitioners;” 4. In course of hearing of the writ application, learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that the Petitioners ventilating their grievance has submitted representation before the Opposite Party No.4 under Annexure-4. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioners that the said representation is pending as of now. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioners that a direction be issued to the Opposite Party No.4 to consider the representation of the Petitioners under Annexure-4 within a stipulated period of time. 5. Learned counsel for the State submits that he has no objection if the representation of the Petitioners is considered by the Opposite Party No.4, which is stated to be pending, in accordance with law within a stipulated period of time. Page 3 of 3. 6. Considering the limited nature of grievance of the Petitioners, the writ application is disposed of at the stage of admission with a direction to the Opposite Party No.4 to consider the representation of the Petitioners under Annexure-4 within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. The Opposite Party No.4 shall do well to dispose of the representation of the Petitioners under Annexure-4 by passing a speaking and reasoned order. The decision so taken by the Opposite Party No.4 be also communicated to the Petitioners within two weeks thereafter. 7. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ application stands disposed of. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. ( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra ) Judge S.K. Rout