Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.1392 of 2026 Priyambada Biswal ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Mahendra Kumar Sahoo -versus- State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv. - Mr. U.C.Jena, A.S.C. CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA Order No. ORDER 12.02.2026 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 the above facts and circumstances of the case, it is humbly prayed that this Hon'ble High Court may graciously be pleased to allow this writ application by granting following reliefs; (A) A writ of mandamus be issued directing the Opp.Parties to grant trained graduate scale of pay in favour of the petitioner as trained graduate teacher w.e.f.27.3.1999 with actual financial benefit w.e.f.28.2.2004 following the ratio of the judgment dtd.23.11.2017 passed in W.P. (C) No.12243/2016 of this Hon'ble High Court arising out of the order / Page 2 of 3. judgment dtd.27.8.2015 passed in O.A.No.754/2011 in the identical case of the same ULB transferred High School, within a stipulated time. Or in alternative, any other order/orders, writ/writs, direction/directions be issued so as to give complete relief to the petitioner in the given facts and circumstances of the case.” 4. In course of hearing of the writ application, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner ventilating his grievance has submitted representation before the State of Orissa, represented through its Commissioner-cum-Secretary to Govt., School & Mass Education Department, Bhubaneswar, Opposite Party No.1 under Annexure-10. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the said representation is pending as of now. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that a direction be issued to the Opposite Party No.1 to consider the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-10 within a stipulated period of time. 5. Learned Additional Standing Counsel submits that he has no objection if the representation of the Petitioner is considered by the Opposite Party No.1, which is stated to be pending, in accordance with law within a stipulated period of time. 6. Considering the limited nature of grievance of the Petitioner, the writ application is disposed of at the stage of admission with a direction to the Opposite Party No.1 to consider the representation dated 20.09.2025 of the Petitioner under Annexure-10 keeping in view the judgments Annexures-7, 8 and implementation of order dated 16.02.2019 at Annexure-9 Page 3 of 3. and disposed of the representation within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. In the event it is found by the Opposite Party No.1 that the Petitioner stands in a similar footing to the persons whose case have been dealt with him Annexures-7, 8 & 9, similar benefits be extended in favour of the present Petitioner within six weeks from the date of a taking such decision. The Opposite Party No.1 shall do well to dispose of the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-10 by passing a speaking and reasoned order. Any decision so taken by the Opposite Party No.1 be also communicated to the Petitioner from time to time. 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