Orissa High Court
WP(C)/24397/2026 of BIJAYA KUMAR PATTNAYAK Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 7 August 2026
of 3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.24397 of 2026 [ODHC010575222026] Bijaya Kumar Pattnayak …. Petitioner Mr. Manas Pati, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & others …. Opp. Parties Mr. S. Mishra,ASC for opposite party nos.1, 2 and 3 CORAM: JUSTICE MRUGANKA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.24397 of 2026
[ODHC010575222026]
Bijaya Kumar Pattnayak
….
Petitioner
Mr. Manas Pati, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha & others
….
Opp. Parties
Mr. S. Mishra,ASC for opposite
party nos.1, 2 and 3
CORAM:
JUSTICE MRUGANKA SEKHAR SAHOO
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
07.08.2026 Hybrid Mode
01. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
The petitioner has retired from Government Service while working as Executive Engineer, Water Corporation (WATCO) Division-III, Aska Road, Berhampur in the district of Ganjam.
The prayer in the writ application is to direct the opposite parties to grant promotional increment and revised to the petitioner in Pay Level-13 as per ORSP Rules, 2017 with effect from the date he joining as Executive Engineer.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel upon instructions received from the petition that the petitioner seeks disposal of the writ petition at the admission stage without notice being issued, with direction to the authorities to consider and dispose of the representations made by the petitioner, copies of which have been annexed to the writ application marked as Annexure-4 and Annexure-9.
4. Learned Additional Standing Counsel upon advance copy served appears for opposite parties, he submits that the petitioner has not impleaded, the authority under whom he last worked, i.e., WATCO, as would be apparent from the cause title of the writ petition.
Learned Additional Standing Counsel further submits, however the appropriate authority shall consider the representation(s) made by the petitioner in accordance with law and take decision within a reasonable time.
5. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Standing Counsel and in view of the limited nature of prayer made by the petitioner, the opposite parties are not asked to the respond to the writ application.
It is directed that the appropriate authority shall do well to consider in accordance with law, the representation(s) of the petitioner already made and take decision as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four months from the date of communication of certified copy of this order along with copies of the representations already made and all other documents sought to be relied upon by the petitioner.
6. After decision is rendered by the authority same shall be communicated to the petitioner within two weeks. The authority, if so required, may ask the petitioner for furnishing any other particulars/details/documents to arrive at a just and fair conclusion on the representation.
This Court has not expressed any opinion regarding the claims of the petitioner and the contentions of the parties to the writ petition.
7. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid directions.
(Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo)
Judge
Gs/Radha Digitally Signed Signed by: GAGAN BIHARI SAMAL Reason: Authentication Location: ohc Date: 11-Aug-2026 20:50:32 Signature Not Verified