Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2026 DAILYLAW 7256 (ORI)

SURATH KUMAR PATTANAIK v. STATE OF ODISHA

WP(C)/11452/2026 · 2026-04-27

Aditya Kumar Mohapatra

Writ Petition (Civil)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page 1 of 1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.11452 of 2026 Surath Kumar Pattanaik ..... Petitioner Represented By Adv. – Mr. Lalit Mohan Nanda -versus- State of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties Represented By Adv. – Mr. Aurobinda Mohanty, ASC CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 27.04.2026 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 counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ petition as well as the documents annexed thereto. 3. The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner with the following prayers:- “In the facts and circumstances narrated above and in the interest of justice, this Hon'ble court may graciously be pleased to issue notice to the Opposite parties, call for the record and after hearing the parties be further pleased to issue writs/ directions/ declarations: In directing the Opposite parties, more particularly the O.P. No.2 for declaring result of the teachers applied for State Award as per Page 2 of 2. resolution No-6726/SME dated 05.04.2022. And allow the writ application with cost. And grant such other relief(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper.” 4. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the Petitioner and keeping in view the limited nature of grievance, this Court disposes of the writ petition permitting the Petitioner to approach the Opposite Party No.2-Director of Secondary Education, Odisha, Bhubaneswar by filing a detailed representation taking therein all the grounds within three weeks from today. In such eventuality, the Opposite Party No.2 shall do well to consider the grievance of the Petitioner in accordance with law and applicable rules and dispose of such representation by passing a speaking and reasoned order within eight weeks from the date the Petitioner approaches the Opposite Party No.2. The final decision so taken by the Opposite Party No.2 on such representation be communicated to the Petitioner within a week thereafter. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. (Aditya Kumar Mohapatra) Judge Debasis