Golakha Bihari Majhi Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Golakha Bihari Majhi Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to the Petitioner to move Opposite Party No.2 for modification/cancellation of the Annexure-10 order dated 12.01.2024; if the application is filed within two (2) weeks, OP No.2 to take a lawful decision within three (3) months and communicate it to the Petitioner.

Issue for consideration

Whether Opposite Party No.4 (B.D.O.) was competent to pass the order dated 12.01.2024 (Annexure-10), the Petitioner contending that the Collector, as his appointing authority, alone is competent.

Court's answer

While disposing of the Writ Petition, the Court permitted the Petitioner to move Opposite Party No.2 for modification/cancellation of the order dtd.12.01.2024 issued by Opposite Party No.4 under Annexure-10, without adjudicating the competence contention.

Ratio / Principle

If such an application is filed within two (2) weeks, Opposite Party No.2 shall take a lawful decision on it within three (3) months from the date of receipt and communicate the order so passed to the Petitioner.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

W.P.(C) No.1494 of 2024 (High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, Biraja Prasanna Satapathy, J.; order dated 12.11.2025): The Petitioner challenged an order dated 12.01.2024 issued by Opposite Party No.4 (B.D.O.) under Annexure-10, contending that the B.D.O. was not competent to pass it since the Collector is his appointing authority; the State, on its counter affidavit, maintained that Annexure-10 was an internal arrangement made by the B.D.O. allocating work between the Petitioner and two other PEOs. Without deciding the competence question, the Court disposed of the Writ Petition permitting the Petitioner to move Opposite Party No.2 for modification/cancellation of the Annexure-10 order, observing that if such application is filed within two (2) weeks, OP No.2 shall take a lawful decision thereon within three (3) months from receipt and communicate it to the Petitioner. No statute or precedent was cited and no monetary relief was awarded.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.1494 of 2024

Golakha Bihari Majhi

…. Petitioner Mr. B.K. Nayak(3), Advocate

-versus-

State of Odisha & Ors. …. Opposite Parties Mr. P.K. Panda, ASC

CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

ORDER

Order No.

12.11.2025

05. 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 challenging the order dtd.12.01.2024 so issued by Opposite Party No.4 under Annexure-10.

4. It is the main contention of the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner that B.D.O is not competent to pass the order in question as the Collector is the appointing authority of the Petitioner.

5. Mr. P.K. Panda, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State on the other hand basing on the stand taken in the counter affidavit contended that Annexure-10 is an internal arrangement made by the B.D.O with regard to allocation of work in between the present Petitioner and two other PEOs.

5.1 . It is accordingly contended that Opposite Party No.4 is quite competent to pass such an order.

// 2 //

6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made, this Court while disposing the Writ Petition permits the Petitioner to move Opposite Party No.2 for modification / cancellation of order dtd.12.01.2024 so issued by Opposite Party No.4 under Annexure-10.

6.1 . It is observed that if such any application will be filed within a period of two (2) weeks hence, Opp. Party No.2 shall do well to take a lawful decision on the same within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of such application. The order so passed by Opp. Party No.2 be communicated to the Petitioner.

7 . With the aforesaid observation and direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge

Subrat

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBRAT KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CU TTACK Date: 17-Nov-2025 10:52:28

Page 2 of 2