Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2026 DAILYLAW 384 (ORI)

BHAGABAN SAHU v. STATE OF ODISHA

WP(C)/116/2026 · 2026-01-08

Biraja Prasanna Satapathy

Writ Petition (Civil)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page 1 of 2. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No. 116 of 2026 Bhagaban Sahu ..... Petitioner Mr. S.K. Mahanty, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Mr. A. Tripathy, AGA CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER 08.01.2026 Order No. 01 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the Opp. Parties. 3. Petitioner has filed the present writ petition inter alia with the following prayer:- “It is therefore, humbly prayed that the Hon'ble Court may be graciously pleased to admit the writ petition, issue rule nisi calling upon the Opposite Parties why the prayer made hereunder should not be allowed and upon showing no cause or insufficient cause make the said rule absolute. Issue writ/writs in the matter of- I) Mandamus directing the Opposite Party No.3, Managing Director, Aska Cooperative Sugar Industries Ltd to regularize the services basing on submission of the Petitioner and law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court regarding regularization of services of workers having completed prolonged and unblemished service by disposing representation at Annexure-12 with a speaking order within a stipulated time as Your Lordship may deem appropriate. Page 2 of 2. II) And/or may pass such order writ/writs, order/orders as the Hon'ble Court may think fit and proper for ends of justice. And for which act of kindness, the Petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.” 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that though highlighting his grievances, Petitioner has filed a representation at Annexure-12 to the Writ Petition before the Opp. Party No. 3, but till date nothing has been done in the matter. In such background, learned counsel for the Petitioner prays that a direction be issued to Opposite Party No. 3 to take a decision on the above noted Petition within a specific time period. 5. Considering the submissions made and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court directs Opposite Party No. 3 to take a decision on the above noted petition in accordance with law, within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of this order and communicate the result of such exercise to the Petitioner. 6. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. (BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge Sneha