Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.6055 of 2026 Manoj Kumar Patri ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Chitta Ranjan Pattnaik -versus- State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv. - Mr. S.K.Parhi, A.S.C. CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA Order No. ORDER 25.02.2026 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 Standing Counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ application as well as the prayer made therein. 3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the following prayer: “Under such circumstance it is therefore prayed that your Lordship's would be graciously pleased to admit this writ application, call for records and after hearing the parties may be pleased to issue a writ/s/order/s/direction/s/ in the nature of mandamus directing the Director Elementary Education Odisha Bhubaneswar to approve his appointment as an Assistant Teacher of RadhaMadhav Jew UP (ME) School, Sadhubir Simulia Baleshwar and may release his salary components admissible to him under law within a stipulated period as this honorable court Page 2 of 3. deems fit and proper. And further may pass any other order/s/direction/s/ as this Hon'ble court deems just and proper to extend relief to the petitioners.” 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at the outset, contended that the Petitioner, who has been appointed against the post of Assistant Teacher in Radha Madhab Jew UP (ME) School, Simulia, has approached this Court challenging the inaction of the Opposite Party No.2 i.e. the Director Elementary Education, Odisha in not approving his appointment to the aforesaid post. In the aforesaid context, learned counsel for the Petitioner, drawing attention of this Court to the letter dated 05.12.2025 of the B.E.O., Simulia to the Director Elementary Education, Odisha, at Annexure-7 contended before this Court that the Opposite Party No.3 has already written a letter to the Opposite Party No.2 seeking approval of the appointment of the Petitioner against the post of Assistant Teacher. Since no decision has been taken by Opposite Party No.2 and no approval has been granted, the Petitioner being aggrieved by such inaction of the Opposite Party No.2 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, on a careful examination of the letter dated 05.12.2025 at Annexue-7, it appears that the case of the Petitioner has already been sent to the Opposite Party No.2 for approval. As such, in the event such letter is still pending before Page 3 of 3. the Opposite Party No.2 for consideration, he will have no objection if this Court directs the Opposite Party No.2 to consider the request of the Opposite Party No.3 vide letter dated 05.12.2025, strictly in accordance with law, within a stipulated period of time. 6. Having regard the submissions made by the learned counsels for the respective parties, on a careful examination of the factual background of the present case, further taking note of the limited nature of the grievance involved in the present writ application and keeping in view the letter dated 05.12.2025 at Annexure-7, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the present writ application at the stage of admission by directing the Opposite Party No.2 to take a final decision on the letter dated 05.12.2025 of the Opposite Party No.3 at Annexure-7 within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of a copy of today’s order. The final decision so taken by the Opposite Party No.2 shall be communicated to the Opposite Party No.3 as expeditiously as possible. 7. With the aforesaid observation, the writ application stands disposed of. 8. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Rubi