Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.21292 of 2026 Pradip Kumar Mishra ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Aurobinda Sahoo -versus- state of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv. – Mr. A. Mohanty, ASC CORAM: MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 13.07.2026 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ application as well as the prayer made therein. 3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the following prayer: “Under the above circumstances, it is humbly prayed that the writ petition may be allowed; And (A) a writ of Mandamus or an appropriate writ may be issued directing the opposite parties to release the salary components of the petitioner in his favour in accordance with the Grant-in-Aid Order, 1994 from the date of his eligibility instead of Block Grant with effect from 01.02.2009 as per the Grant-in-Aid Order, 2009; keeping in view the judgment of this Hon'ble Court rendered in the case of State of Odisha and another Vs. Ratnakar Page 2 of 3. Mohapatra and another (F.A.O No.509 of 2014 disposed of on 19.03.2025 along with batch of cases), which has been upheld by the Hon'ble Apex Court vide order dated 25.03.2026 by dismissing several SLPS filed by the State Government, which were tagged to S.L.P (Civil) Diary No.6943 of 2026, and also in view of the order dated 06.04.2026 passed by this Hon'ble Court in F.A.O No.926 of 2018 in respect of similarly situated employees of the aided educational institution and further the differential arrears may be calculated and may be paid to him, within a time to be stipulated by this Hon'ble Court; (B) And any other order J orders or direction/directions may be issued so as to give complete relief to the petitioner; And for this act of kindness, the petitioner shall as in duty bound remain ever pray.” 4. In course of hearing of the writ application, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner ventilating his grievance has submitted representation before the Director, Higher Education, Odisha, Bhubaneswar, Opposite Party No.2 under Annexure-3. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the said representation is pending as of now. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that a direction be issued to the Opposite Party No.2 to consider the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-3 within a stipulated period of time. 5. Learned Additional Standing Counsel submits that he has no objection if the representation of the Petitioner is considered by the Opposite Party No.2, which is stated to be pending, 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.2 to consider the representation of the Petitioner dated 30.03.2026 under Annexure-3 within a period of Page 3 of 3. eight weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. The Opposite Party No.2 shall do well to dispose of the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-3 by passing a speaking and reasoned order by taking into account order passed in FAO No.509 of 2014. The decision so taken by the Opposite Party No.2 be also communicated to the Petitioner within ten days thereafter. 7. With the aforesaid observations and directions, 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