Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2026 DAILYLAW 1680 (ORI)

RAMESH CHANDRA NAYAK v. STATE OF ODISHA

WP(C)/3289/2026 · 2026-02-03

Aditya Kumar Mohapatra

Writ Petition (Civil)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page 1 of 2. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.3289 of 2026 Ramesh Chandra Nayak ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Ajaya Kumar Tripathy -versus- 1) State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Parties 2) Director Of Elementary Education, Bhubaneswar 3) District Education Officer, Kendrapara 4) Block Education Officer, Marshaghai 5) Office Of The Controller Of Accounts, Bhubaneswar Represented by Adv. - Mr.U.C.Jena, A.S.C. CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA Order No. ORDER 03.02.2026 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. Petitioner has filed the present writ petition inter alia with the following prayer: “It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to:- i) Admit the writ application; ii) Call for the records; iii) Issue a writ of Mandamus directing 0pp. Parties, more particularly to the 0pp. Party No — 3 for drawal and disbursement of differential financial benefits at an early date in favour of the petitioner by extending one Page 2 of 2. notional periodical annual increment w.e.f. 01.07.2021 as the petitioner entered into Govt. Service on 26.07.1995 and retired from Govt.Service w.e.f. 30.06.2021 without getting the normal annual periodical increment on 01.07.2021. iv) And/or pass such other order/orders, direction/directions as this Hon'ble Court may think fit and proper for the ends of justice.” 4. However, taking into account the claim raised in the present Writ Petition, liberty is granted to the Petitioner to make a fresh representation before Opp. Party No. 3 by enclosing all the relevant documents and citations in support of his claim, if any, within a period of three (3) weeks hence. 5. It is observed that if such representation is filed within the aforesaid time period, Opp. Party No. 3 shall do well to take a lawful decision on the same within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of such representation. The order so passed by Opp. Party No. 3 be communicated to the Petitioner. 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Rubi