Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.5252 of 2026 Lokanath Patra ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Adnan Sarmadi -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv. – Sasmita Nayak, A.S.C. CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 17.02.2026 Order No. 01. 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 Standing Counsel 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: “Therefore the petitioner most respectfully prays that Your Lordship would graciously be pleased to admit the case, call for the relevant records and after hearing may be pleased to:- (i) direct the Opp. No.3 to consider the representation dated 08.09.2025/Annexure-7 in terms of the Amendment Rule 2025 within a stipulated time period. (ii) direct Opp.party No.3 to issue appointment order and Page 2 of 3. other consequential benefits in favor of the petitioner in terms of Annexure -6 wherein similarly situated persons are extended with Rehabilitation Appointment. (iii) And pass any other order/orders, direction/directions as it would be deemed fit and proper to the facts and circumstances of the case in order to provide complete justice to the petitioner.” 4. It is stated by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that being aggrieved by the inaction of the Opposite Parties in considering the case of the Petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground under the Orissa Civil Service Rehabilitation Assistant Rules, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present application. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that ventilating his grievance he has already approached the Opposite Party No.3, the District Education Officer, Kendrapara by filing a detailed representation dated 08.09.2025 at Annexure-7, however, the same has not been disposed of as of now. Being aggrieved by such inaction, the Petitioner has filed 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, taking into consideration the fact that the Petitioner has already approached the Opposite Party No.3 for redressal of his grievance and in the event the representation of the Petitioner is still pending for consideration, he will have no objection if this directs the Opposite Party No.3 to consider and dispose of the representation of the Petitioner by strictly in accordance with law within a stipulated period of time. Page 3 of 3. 6. Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, further taking into consideration the nature of the prayer, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ application at the stage of admission by directing the Opposite Party No.3 to consider the grievance of the Petitioner as indicated in his representation dated 08.09.2025 at annexure-7 strictly in accordance with law and dispose of the same by passing a speaking and reasoned order within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of a certified copy of this order by the Petitioner. The final decision so taken by the Opposite Party No.3 be also communicated to the Petitioner within ten days from the date of taking such a decision. 7. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the writ application stands disposed of. 8. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Anil Designation: Junior Stenographer