Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.10038 of 2026 Ratnamayee Behera ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Subhasree Mohanty -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv. – Sasmita Nayak, A.S.C. CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 07.04.2026 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical 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: “In the above facts and circumstances, the petitioner most respectfully prays that, this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit the writ petition, call for the records and after hearing the parties, may be pleased to pass the following reliefs: a) An appropriate direction may kindly be issued to the Opp. Parties to grant her UGC Scale of Pay arrear as per Government of India letter dated 24.12.1996 for the period from 01.01.1986 to 01.01.1996, as the same has Page 2 of 3. already been given to some of the similarly situated employees; b) An appropriate direction may kindly be issued to the Opp. Parties to grant her the personal pay in the Scale of Rs. 8,000-13,500/- equivalent to that of a lecturer as per the UGC letter dated 21.07.1999 and extend the consequential benefits thereof in favour of the petitioner as early as possible, as the petitioner was retired since 30.11.2022; c) And may pass such other Order/ Orders/ Direction/ Directions as may be deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.” 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that the Petitioner being aggrieved by the inaction of the Opposite Parties in extending the UGC scale of pay arrear to the Petitioner for the period from 01.01.1986 to 01.01.1996 has approached this Court by filing the present writ application. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at this juncture contended that although he has approached the Opposite Party No.1 by filing a detailed representation dated 08.09.2025 at Annexure-7, however, no final decision has been taken on such representation. Being aggrieved by such inaction of the Opposite Party No.1, the Petitioner 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, taking into consideration the fact that the Petitioner has already approached the competent authority for redressal of his grievance, she will have no objection in the event the this Court directs the Opposite Party No.1 to dispose of the representation of the Petitioner in accordance with law within a stipulated period of time, Page 3 of 3. if the same is still pending. 6. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties, on a careful examination of the background facts, further taking note of the limited nature of the grievance involved in the present writ application, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ application at the stage of admission by directing the Opposite Party No.1 to consider and dispose of the representation of the Petitioner dated 08.09.2025 at Annexure-7 within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of a certified copy of this order by the Petitioner. The representation of the Petitioner shall be disposed of by passing a speaking and reasoned order after taking into consideration the orders at Annexure-5 series passed in favour of the similarly situated persons. The final decision so taken by the Opposite Party No.1 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. 8. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Anil Designation: Junior Stenographer