Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2026 DAILYLAW 153 (ORI)

GOURANGA CHARAN DALAI v. STATE OF ODISHA

WP(C)/6530/2026 · 2026-03-05

Biraja Prasanna Satapathy

Writ Petition (Civil)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.6530 of 2026 Gouranga Charan Dalai …. Petitioner Ms. S. Das, Adv. -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. …. Opposite Parties Mr. P.P. Behera, ASC COROM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No ORDER 05.03.2026 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for Petitioner and learned counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. 3. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer:- “In view of the facts and circumstances stated hereinabove, the petitioner most respectfully prays that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow this Writ Petition and further be pleased to: 1. Direct the Opposite Parties to regularize the service of the Petitioner as Mali in Vyasanagar Municipality (Opposite Party No. 3) with effect from his date of appointment i.e. 24.03.1999. 2. direct the Opposite Parties to consider and dispose of the Petitioner's representation dated 08.09.2025 (Annexure-6). Within a stipulated time period by regularising in the post of Mali with effect from his Date of appointment i.e. 24.03.1999. 3. Pass such other or further order(s) as may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case for the ends of justice and equity. And for this act of kindness, the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.” 4. In course of hearing, learned counsel for the Petitioner state that highlighting his grievances, the Petitioner has made a representation to Opposite Party No.2 vide Annexure-6 and the same may be directed to be considered within a stipulated time, to which learned Counsel for the State has no objection. 5. As agreed by learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, disposes of the Writ Petition directing Opposite Party No.2 to consider the representation filed by the petitioner vide Annexure-6 in accordance with law within a period of three (3) months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Jyoti