Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.12118 of 2026 Bankanidhi Pradhan and others ..... Petitioners Represented by Adv. - Pratap Kumar Mohanty -versus- State Of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv. – Mr. U.C. Jena, ASC CORAM: MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 05.05.2026 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners as well as learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ petition as well as documents annexed thereto. 3. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with the following prayers: “Therefore it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be graciously be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus directing the Opposite Parties to consider the performance report of the petitioners as CRCCs having more than five years experience and allow them to continue as CRCCs in their respective place of posting. And issue any other appropriate writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s) as this Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper. And for this act of kindness the petitioners shall as in duty bound shall ever pray.” Page 2 of 3. 4. It is stated by the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners that the Petitioners being aggrieved by inaction of the Opposite Party in extending the tenure of the Petitioners as CRCCs basing of his performance report is pending before the Collector has approached this Court by filing the present writ application. He further contended that the Petitioners have already approached the Opposite Party No.4, the District Project Coordinator by filing a detailed representation at Annexure-4 to the writ application. Since no decision has been taken by the Opposite Party No.4 on such representation of the Petitioners, the Petitioners being aggrieved by such inaction of the Opposite Party No.4 has approached this Court by filing the present writ application. 5. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that although he has no specific instruction in the matter, however on perusal of the writ application it appears that the Petitioners have already approached the competent authority for redressal of his grievance by filing a representation at Annexure-5 to the writ application. Further submitted that in the event such representation is still pending and no final decision has been taken, he will have no objection, this Court directs the Opposite Party No.4 to consider the case of the Petitioners in accordance with law within a stipulated period of time. 6. Considering the limited nature of grievance of the Petitioner, the writ application is disposed of at the stage of admission with a direction to the Opposite Party No.4 to consider the representation of the Petitioners under Annexure-5 within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of certified Page 3 of 3. copy of this order. The Opposite Party No.4 shall do well to dispose of the representation of the Petitioners under Annexure-5 by passing a speaking and reasoned order. The decision so taken by the Opposite Party No.4 be also communicated to the Petitioner within ten days thereafter. 7. With the aforesaid observation/ direction, the writ application stands disposed of. 8. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. ( A.K. Mohapatra) Judge Sisir Designation: PERSONAL ASSISTANT