p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 20257 of 2026 Kanchan Kumar Pradhan …. Petitioner Mr. N. Lenka, Advocate -versus- 1. State of Odisha, represented through its Secretary, Panchayati Raj and Drinking Water Department, Lok Seva Bhawan, Bhubaneswar, Dist- Khordha 2. The Collector and District Magistrate, Mayurbhanj 3. The Chief Development Officer, Zilla Parishad Mayurbhanj 4. The Block Development Officer, Badasahi Panchayat Samiti, At/Po-Badasahi, Dist-Mayurbhanj. 5. The Project Director, D.R.D.A, Mayurbhanj, At/Po- Baripada, Dist- Mayurbhanj …. Opposite Parties Mr. M. R. Mohanty, AGA p. 2 CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH Order No. ORDER 15.07.2026 06. 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. The Petitioner, who is stated to be the Vice- Chairman of the Badasahi Block, has filed the present writ application in his representative capacity making a grievance that in gross violation of the guidelines of ‘Bikashita Gaon Bikashita Odisha’ (BGBO) Scheme, without taking up the projects as identified by Grama Sabha and in violation of the very guidelines, which envisages a definite role for the Panchayati Raj Institution in keeping with the constitutional mandate, the projects have been selected solely on the basis of recommendation of the M.L.A.. 3. It is submitted that ventilating their grievance, representation has been made to the Collector and District Magistrate on 01.06.2026 and he has referred the matter to the Project Director, D.R.D.A, Mayurbhanj (Opposite Party No.5) to consider the grievance of the Petitioner. And, alleging inaction in such matter, the present writ application has been filed. 4. The learned counsel for the State, Mr. Mohanty, AGA, submits that without awaiting the decision taken by the Project Director, D.R.D.A, Mayurbhanj (Opposite Party No.5), the Petitioner has p. 3 rushed to this Court and it is his further submission that the M.L.A. being a public representative, there is no irregularity as alleged in taking up the projects recommended by him and it is well within the schematic arrangements of BGBO. 5. Be that as it may, since the executive is in session of the grievance as raised by the Petitioner, this Court is persuaded to hold that interest of justice would be sub served if the Project Director, D.R.D.A, Mayurbhanj (Opposite Party No.5) is called upon to consider the grievance of the Petitioner, in the event copy of the writ Petition along with the order passed on this date is submitted within a period of one week of uploading of the order. If such timeline is adhered to, the Project Director, D.R.D.A, Mayurbhanj (Opposite Party No.5) shall do well to dispose of the same within a period of four weeks from the date of submission of such representation after giving opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner as the representative of the block in question. 6. At this stage, the learned counsel for the Petitioner, Mr. Lenka prays for issuance of the interim order. 7. This Court is not inclined to pass such order considering the assurance given by the learned p. 4 counsel for the State that the grievance will be mitigated within a period of four weeks, as directed. In the event the same is not disposed of within the time frame as prescribed above, it shall be open for the Petitioner to seek redressal in accordance with law. 8. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. 9. UCC as per rules. (V. Narasingh) Judge Santoshi