Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2026 DAILYLAW 12908 (ORI)

SHAILESH KUMAR NAYAK v. STATE OF ODISHA

WP(C)/8674/2026 · 2026-03-25

Aditya Kumar Mohapatra

Writ Petition (Civil)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.8674 of 2026 Shailesh Kumar Nayak ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Jyoti Ranjan Deo -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv. – A.Mohanty, A.S.C. CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 25.03.2026 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner as well as learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing 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 facts and circumstances as narrated above, this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue notice to the Opp. Parties and after hearing the parties, be pleased to direct the Opp. Parties to regularize the services of the petitioner as a Lecturer from the date of his initial joining as a Full Time Resource Person, i.e. 25.04.2006 and to release the consequential service benefits in his favour as expeditiously as possible and further be pleased to pass such other order/orders as this Page 2 of 3. Hon'ble Court deems just and proper.” 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 by filing a detailed representation dated 05.02.2026 at Annexure-7. He further contended that despite filing of such representation by the Petitioner for redressal of his grievance, the Opposite Party No.1 has not taken any final decision. Being aggrieved by such inaction, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ application. 5. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended 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 in the event the representation dated 05.02.2026 at Annexure-7 is pending for taking a final decision by the Opposite Party No.1, he will have no objection if this Court directs the Opposite Party No.1 to dispose of the representation of the Petitioner strictly in accordance with law within a stipulated period of time. 6. Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, further taking into consideration the nature of the prayer, this Court to dispose of the writ application at the stage of admission by directing the Opposite Party No.1 to consider the grievance of the Petitioner as indicated in his representation dated 05.02.2026 at Annexure-7 strictly in accordance with law and dispose of the same by passing a speaking and reasoned order within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of a certified copy of this order by the Petitioner. The final decision so taken by the Opposite Party No.1 be also communicated to the Page 3 of 3. Petitioner within ten days from the date of taking such a decision. 7. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the writ application stands disposed of. 8. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Anil Designation: Junior Stenographer