IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.15550 of 2026 Sadhu Chandra @ Charan Turuk …. Petitioner Mr. B.K. Panda, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. …. Opposite Parties Mr. S.P. Das, ASC COROM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No ORDER 20.05.2026 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for appearing for the Parties. 3. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer:- “It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to consider the facts stated in the writ petition, admit the same, issue Rule NISI calling upon the Opp. Parties to show cause and may kindly issue writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ applicable and direct the Opposite parties to fix the grade pay of the petitioner of Rs.5400/- as per clause-10 of the Govt. Resolution dated- 06.02.2013 under Anneuxre-2 from the date of completion of 30 years of service, and as per the decision passed in State of Odisha -Vs-Biharilal Barik decided by this Hon'ble Court, in W.P.C No-2831/2016, disposed of on 27.06.2016, (Dairy No (s). 20358/2017, and as per the letter No.18750, dtd.09.09.2025 issued by the O.P No.4 under Annexure-6 as deemed just and proper. And further direct to the Opp.Parties to pay the service and arrear benefits as per the fixation of grade pay in pursuant to the resolution dated 06.02.2013 and 13.02.2025 under Anneuxre-2. If the Opp.Parties fail to show cause or show insufficient cause then the rule may kindly be made absolute. And/or pass any other order/orders, direction/directions, writ/writs as this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper; p. 2 p. 2 And for which act of kindness, the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.” 4. In course of hearing, learned counsel for the Petitioner states that highlighting his grievance, Petitioner has made a representation to Opposite Party No.2 vide Annexure-8 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-8 within a period of three (3) months in accordance with law from the date of production of certified copy of this order. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Subrat