Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.12189 of 2026 Pritish Muduli ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Shashi Bhusan Jena -versus- State Of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties Mr. S.K. Parhi, ASC CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 07.05.2026 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner 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: “In view of the abovementioned facts and circumstances of the case, this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to: (i) Issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction directing the Opposite Parties to extend full financial benefits to the Petitioner from 01.01.1986 to 31.12.1995, instead of restricting the same from 01.01.1996, in parity with similarly situated Demonstrators (ii) Direct the Opposite Parties to disburse all Page 2 of 3. arrears of salary arising out of such revision of pay from 01.01.1986, along with admissible interest, within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court; (iii) Direct the Opposite Parties to refix the pension and all retiral benefits of the Petitioner on the basis of such revised UGC scale of pay, including all notional increments and consequential benefits. (iv) Direct the Opposite Parties to refix the Petitioner's pay in the revised UGC scale of Rs. 8,000-13,500/- with on terms of UGC letter dtd. 31-7-1999 effect from 01.01.2002, in parity with similarly situated Demonstrators, and to disburse all arrears of salary, pensionary, and other consequential benefits arising out of such fixation. Or pass such other order/orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 4. It is stated by learned counsel for the Petitioner that although the Petitioner has approached the Opposite Party No.1 by filing a representation dated 25.07.2025 at Annexure-7 to the writ petition, however, no final decision has been taken on such representation. Being aggrieved by such inaction by 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 Page 3 of 3. the Opposite Party No.1, who is the competent authority and in the event no final decision has been taken on such representation of the Petitioner dated 25.07.2025 at Annexure-7, he will have no objection in the event this Court directs the Opposite Party No.1 to take a lawful decision on such representation within a stipulated period of time. 6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties, on a careful analysis of their submission and on a close scrutiny of the document annexed to the writ petition, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ petition at the stage of admission by directing the Opposite Party No.1 to consider and dispose of the representation of the Petitioner, taking into consideration the letters at Annexures-4 & 5, within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of a certified copy of today’s order. The Opposite Party No.1 shall do well to dispose of the representation of the Petitioner by passing a speaking and reasoned order. The final decision so taken be communicated to the Petitioner within ten days 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