Page 1 of 4. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.5501 of 2026 Chinmayee Sethi ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Laxmikanta Mohanty along with Rasmita Das -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv. – D.K. Sahoo, A.G.A. CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 30.03.2026 Order No. 02. 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 Govt. Advocate 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: “It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue notice to the opp. Parties calling upon them to file show cause as to why:- i) A direction shall not be issued to regularize the services of husband of the petitioner late Nabin Kumar Sethi as Level-V Primary School Teacher w.e.f. 22.4.2016 taking into consideration the Resolution passed by Opp.party No. 1 dated Page 2 of 4. 25.07.2016 under Annexure-3 as well as the Judgment rendered by this Hon’ble Court in between Balabhadra Majhi Vrs State of Odisha and others in W.P.(C) No. 15345 of 2022 dated 11.11.2022 and to release arrear salary of Late Nabin Kumar Sethi from 22.4.2016 to 25.09.2020; ii) And after hearing the parties be pleased to direct the opp.parties to regularize the service of husband of the petitioner late Nabin Kumar Sethi as Level-V Primary School Teacher w.e.f. 22.4.2016 and release all arrears till his death dated 25.09.2020 , in favour of the petitioner; within a date to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court. And pass any other order/orders, direction/directions as deemed fit and proper.” 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that the husband of the Petitioner was initially engaged as Non- Formal Educator on 25.01.1991. Thereafter, he was again engaged as Education Volunteer with effect from 23.04.2003. While working as such, the husband of the Petitioner was engaged as Gana Sikhyak by the Opposite Party No.3 with effect from 21.04.2008. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at this juncture contended that while the husband of the Petitioner was working as such, the Opposite Party No.1 passed a resolution for regularization of the service of the husband of the Petitioner on 27.01.2016 at Annexure-2 to the writ application. She further contended that the Opposite Party No.1 fixed the modalities for regularization vide his letter dated 25.07.2016 at Annexure-3 to the writ application. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at this juncture contended that while this was the position, the husband of the Petitioner passed Diploma in Elementary Education in the year 2014. She Page 3 of 4. further contended that the husband of the Petitioner completed eight years of service on 22.04.2016, therefore, the service of the Petitioner should have been regularized by the Opposite Party. While this was the position, the husband of the Petitioner died on 25.09.2020. Accordingly, the Petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for regularization of the service of her late husband and for a direction to the Opposite Parties to pay all retail, financial, and pensionary benefits as is due and admissible to her husband. 6. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that although he has no specific instruction in the matter, however, on perusal of the record it appears that the Petitioner, who happens to be the wife of a deceased Gana Sikhyak, has approached this Court with a prayer for regularization of the service of the husband of the Petitioner and for payment of retiral as well as pensionary benefits as is due and admissible to her late husband. Learned Additional Government Advocate at this juncture contended that the Petitioner has not approached the Opposite Parties before approaching this Court by filing the present writ application. In such view of the matter, he further submitted that he will have no objection if this Court directs the Petitioner to approach the Opposite Party No.2, i.e., the Director Elementary Education, Odisha, who is the competent authority in the matter, by filing a detailed representation with a corresponding direction to Opposite Party No.2 to consider such representation strictly in accordance with law and the applicable rules within a stipulated period of time. 7. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsels appearing for the respective parties, on a careful examination of the factual background as well as taking note of the grievance of the Page 4 of 4. present Petitioner, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the present writ application at this stage by granting liberty to the Petitioner to file a detailed representation taking therein all the grounds along with all supporting documents within three weeks from today before Opposite Party No.2. In such eventuality, the Opposite Party No.2 shall consider such representation of the Petitioner strictly in accordance with the applicable rules/ guidelines, and the law, and dispose of the representation by passing a speaking and reasoned order within eight weeks thereafter. The final order so passed by the Opposite Party No.2 be communicated to the Petitioner within two weeks thereafter. 8. 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