Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.21390 of 2026 Tapaswini Pattnaik ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Sukanta Kumar Mishra -versus- State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv. – S.K. Parhi, A.S.C. CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 14.07.2026 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner as well as learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State- Opposite Parties. Perused the writ application as well as the documents annexed thereto. 3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the following prayer: “Under the above circumstances it is therefore humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be graciously pleased to direct the Opposite Party no.2 to take necessary steps on the recommendation made by the Opposite Party No.3 for the approval of the services of the petitioner and for release of salaries in her favour. And further this Hon'ble Court be pealed to direct the opposite parties to revise the pension of the petitioner. And/or issue any other Writ/Writs, order/orders, Page 2 of 3. direction/directions as this Hon'ble Court may deems fit and proper for the ends of justice..” 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at the outset, contended that being aggrieved by the inaction of the Opposite Party No.2, the Director, Higher Education, Govt. of Odisha. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that the Regional Director of Education, Bhubaneswar, Opposite Party No.3 has already recommended the case of the Petitioner to the Opposite Party No.2 vide his letter dated 11.05.2026 at Annexure-7 to the writ application. However, no steps have been taken by the Opposite Party No.2 pursuant to the recommendation of the Opposite Party No.3. Being aggrieved such inaction on the part of the Opposite Party No.2, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ application. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contended that although the Petitioner is eligible for approval under the GIA order, 2009, however, his case has not been considered due to inaction on the part of the Opposite Party No.2. Accordingly, it was prayed that the Opposite Party No.2 be directed to extend the benefit of GIA order, 2009 in favour of the Petitioner. 5. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, contended that he has no specific instruction in the matter. He further submitted that in the event the matter is pending before the Opposite Party No.2 and no final decision has been taken, he will have no objection in the event this Court directs the Opposite Party No.2 to take a final decision in the matter in accordance with law and the applicable rules within a stipulated period of time. 6. Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, further taking into consideration the nature of the prayer, Page 3 of 3. this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ application at the stage of admission by directing the Opposite Party No.2 to take a final decision on the letter at Annexure-7 dated 11.05.2026 of the Opposite Party No.3 and pass necessary consequential orders within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of a certified copy of this order by the Petitioner. The final decision so taken by the Opposite Party No.2 be also communicated to the Petitioner within ten days from the date of taking such a decision. 7. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the writ application stands disposed of. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Anil Designation: Junior Stenographer