Page 1 of 4. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.4572 of 2026 Madhusmita Giri ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Durgesh Narayan Rath -versus- State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv. – S. Behera, A.G.A. CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 10.02.2026 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 Government Advocate 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 circumstance, it is therefore humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be graciously pleased to issue a writ in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order by quashing the notification dated 05.02.2026 passed by the opposite party no.1 vide Annexure-2 to the writ petition and directing the opposite parties to allow her to discharge her duty as Block Education Officer, Badasahi Page 2 of 4. in the district of Mayurbhanj. And this Hon’ble Court be pleased to pass any further order/ orders, direction/ directions as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that the present Petitioner, who is working as B.E.O at Badasahi, Mayurbhanj, has been transferred and posted as B.E.O, Basudevpur, Bhadrak by virtue of order dated 05.02.2026 at Annexure-2 passed by the Additional Secretary to Government, School and Mass Education Department. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that such transfer order at Annexure-2 is highly illegal as the same is contrary to the Resolution of the Government dated 18.09.2025 at Annexure-3. Further, referring to the Resolution dated 18.09.2025 at Annexure- 3, learned counsel for the Petitioner contended normally the transfer took place between 15th of April to 15th of June as has been indicated in the said Resolution. Moreover, such Resolution further indicates that in the event the government employee is required to be transferred on any administrative exigencies beyond the general transfer season, then approval of the next higher authority shall be obtained by the controlling authority. In view of the aforesaid provisions contained in the Resolution dated 18.09.2025 at Annexure-3, learned counsel for the Petitioner alleged that the Petitioner has been transferred in violation of such policy of the Government. 5. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that although he has no specific instruction in the matter. However, it appears that the order has been passed by the Government, Page 3 of 4. therefore, no further approval is necessary for transfer of the present Petitioner beyond the transfer season. He further contended that in the event the Petitioner is aggrieved by the conduct of the Opposite Parties, he should have approached the Opposite Parties first before approaching this Court by filing the present writ application. On such ground, learned counsel for the State contended that the present writ application is devoid of merit and, accordingly, the same should be dismissed. 6. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsels appearing for the respective parties, on a careful examination of the background facts as well as the documents annexed to the present writ application, this Court observes that the Petitioner being aggrieved by the order of the transfer dated 05.02.2026 at Annexure-2 has approached this Court by filing the present writ application. On perusal of the record it does not appear that the Petitioner has ever approached the competent authority for reconsideration of this decision keeping in view the Resolution dated 18.09.2025 at Annexure-3. In such view of the matter, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ application at the stage of admission by granting liberty to the Petitioner to approach the Opposite Party No.1 by filing a detailed representation taking therein all the grounds along with all supporting documents within a week from today. In such eventuality, the Opposite Party No.1 shall consider the representation of the Petitioner keeping in view the transfer policy vide Resolution dated 18.09.2025 at Annexure-3 and pass necessary orders on the representation of the Petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date the Petitioner approaches the Opposite Party No.1. The final decision so taken by Page 4 of 4. the Opposite Party No.1 be also communicated to the Petitioner within a week thereafter. 7. It is further directed that in the event the Petitioner has not been relieved from her present place of posting, she shall not be relieved for a period of six weeks. 8. With the aforesaid observation/ direction, the writ application stands disposed of. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Anil Designation: Junior Stenographer