Orissa High Court

WP(C)/26310/2026 of MANJULATA NAYAK Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 2 September 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.26310 of 2026 CNR No. ODHC010622592026 Manjulata Nayak …. Petitioners Mr. P. Ch. Mohanty, Adv. -versus- State of Orissa and Others …. Opposite Parties Mr. S. P. Das, ASC COROM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No ORDER 02.09.2026 01.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C) No.26310 of 2026

CNR No. ODHC010622592026

Manjulata Nayak

….

Petitioners

Mr. P. Ch. Mohanty,

Adv.

-versus-

State of Orissa and Others

….

Opposite Parties

Mr. S. P. Das, ASC

COROM:

JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

Order No

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

ORDER

02.09.2026

01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode.

2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties.

3. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer:- “It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that your lordship may graciously be pleased to admit this Writ Application and issue Rule NISI to the opp. parties to show cause as to why they shall not be directed to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization of her contractual service period with effect from the date of her initial engagement by granting six notional increment like other similarly situated persons within a stipulated period. And on their failing to show cause or showing insufficient cause, the said Rule be made absolute by issuing appropriate writ(s); And pass such further order(s) as may be deemed fit and proper. And for this act of kindness the petitioner shall, as in duty bound ever pray.”

// 2 //

4. In course of hearing, learned counsel for the Petitioner states that highlighting his grievance, Petitioner has made a representation to Opposite Party No.3 vide Annexure-7 and the same may be directed to be considered within a stipulated time, to which learned Counsel for the State has no objection.

5. As agreed by learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, disposes of the Writ Petition directing Opposite Party No.3 to consider the representation filed by the Petitioner vide Annexure-7 within a period of three (3) months in accordance with law from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy)

Judge Jyoti/Utkalika Digitally Signed Signed by: UTKALIKA NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 03-Sep-2026 11:59:15 Signature Not Verified

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead