Orissa High Court
WP(C)/23328/2026 of DIPAK KUMAR PRADHAN Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 13 August 2026
HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C ) NO.23328 of 2026 CNR No. DHC010547022026 Dipak Kumar Pradhan …. Petitioner Mr. S. Mallik, Adv. -versus- State of Odisha & Others …. Opp. Parties Mr. S.P. Das, ASC CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C ) NO.23328 of 2026
CNR No. DHC010547022026
Dipak Kumar Pradhan
….
Petitioner
Mr. S. Mallik, Adv.
-versus-
State of Odisha & Others
….
Opp. Parties
Mr. S.P. Das, ASC
CORAM:
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
Order No.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
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…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
13.08.2026
1.
1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid
Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode.
2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.
3. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer:
Under the aforesaid facts and circumstance the Petitioner humbly prays that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to,
(I) Quash the DPC proceeding dtd.15.10.2025 as at Annexure-1 and the order dtd.10.11.2025 promoting Opp. party No.5 against UR vacancy on own merit concept as at Annexure-2.
(ii) Direct/order that the Opp. party No.5 shall be promoted against ST reserved vacancy.
(iii) Pass such other orders as may be deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice.
// 2 //
And for this act of kindness the Petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.
4. It is contended that even though against order dtd.10.11.2025 so issued by Opp. party No.3 under Annexure-2 Petitioner made a representation for consideration of his grievance under Annexure-5, but Opp. party No.3 instead of taking a decision on the same, has forwarded the matter to the District Sub- Registrar-Opp. Party No.4.
4.1. It is contended that since against the order passed by Opp. party No.3, the representation was filed under Annexure-5, Opp. party No.3 should have taken a decision on the same, instead of sending the matter to the District Sub-Registrar for consideration. It is accordingly contended that Opp. party No.3 be directed to take a lawful decision on the grievance made under Annexure-5 within a stipulated time period.
4.2. Learned Addl. Standing Counsel has no serious objection to the course of action proposed by the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner.
5. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and considering the submission made, this
// 3 //
Court while disposing the Writ Petition directs Opp. party No.3 to take a lawful decision on Annexure-5, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 2(two) months from the date of receipt of this order and communicate the result thereof to the Petitioner within the aforesaid time period.
6. The Writ Petition accordingly stands disposed of.
(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy)
Judge sangita Digitally Signed Signed by: SANGITA PATRA Reason: AUTHENTICIATON OF ORDER Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 19-Aug-2026 13:21:02 Signature Not Verified