IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 8888 of 2026 Kamalsaya Pujari …. Petitioner Mr. A. Das, Advocate -versus- 1. State of Odisha, represented by its, Commissioner- cum-Secretary to Govt. of Odisha, Panchayati Raj & Drinking Water Department, Lok Seva Bhawan, Bhubaneswar, Dist.: Khurda 2. Collector & District Magistrate, Nabarangpur 3. CDO-cum-EO, Jilla Parishad, Nabarangpur 4. Block Development Officer, Jharigam Panchayat Samiti, Nabarangpur …. Opposite Parties Mr. M.R. Mohanty, AGA Ms. J. R. Tripathy, Special Counsel CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH Order No. ORDER 26.03.2026 01. 1. Learned counsel Ms. Jyotsna Rani Tripathy submits that she has instruction to appear on behalf of the Opposite Party Nos.1 to 3 as the Special Counsel for MGNREGS (PR & DW Dept.) and files memo of appearance. The same is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the Opposite Parties. 3. The grievance of the Petitioner, who is a Mate, is non-payment as per the final bill relating to construction of IMP of Road from Sindhipada Village Road with C.C. work, Ichhapur Gram Panchayat. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that in view of Annexure-6, the final bill having been prepared by the Block Development Officer, Jharigam Panchayat Samiti, Nabarangpur- Opposite Party No.4 and being counter signed by the Panchayat Samiti in question, inaction in the matter of payment gives rise to cause of action, to move this Court. 5. Per contra, Ms. Tripathy, learned Special Counsel for the Opposite Parties submits that admittedly the Petitioner has not ventilated his grievance before the authorities. Hence, on that score alone, the writ petition is liable to be rejected. 6. Considering the rival submissions, liberty is granted to the Petitioner to move the Opposite Party No.2-Collector & District Magistrate, Nabarangpur ventilating his grievance relating to non-payment of the final bill within a period of four weeks hence enclosing the copy of the writ petition along with the order passed by this Court. 7. In the event such a representation is made, the Opposite Party No.2 shall do well to dispose of the same expeditiously after giving an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner. 8. It is needless to state that this Court has not expressed any view regarding the veracity of the claim in the writ petition. 9. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. 10. U.C.C. as per rules. (V. Narasingh) Judge Santoshi