Namita Hota Vs State of Orissa — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Namita Hota Vs State of Orissa — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty reserved to the petitioner to make an appropriate application to the concerned authorities with supporting documents within two weeks; Jurisdictional Authorities to decide and communicate the result within six weeks; all contentions kept open; no costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to grant of RACP-MACP benefit after putting in the requisite number of years of service under the extant policy, and whether the non-grant thereof is justified.

Court's answer

The writ petition is disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to make an appropriate application to the concerned authorities, supported by necessary documents, within two weeks; if such representation is made, the Jurisdictional Authorities shall take a decision and inform the petitioner of the result within an outer limit of six weeks.

Ratio / Principle

All contentions of the parties are kept open, and the consideration of the representation shall be in the light of the decision of a coordinate Bench of this Court in Ashok Kumar Mohapatra -vrs.- State of Orissa (O.A.No.1668 of 2017, disposed of vide judgment dated 09.10.2018, confirmed in W.P.(C) No.6698 of 2010 and further confirmed by the apex Court in SLP(C) No.15573 of 2020).

Key takeaways

Opposite Party Nos. 2 and 3 may solicit any information or documents from the petitioner required for due consideration of the representation, but no delay shall be brooked on that account.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (W.P.(C) No.20202 of 2025, High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, Dixit Krishna Shripad, J., order dated 17.10.2025): The petitioner's grievance was non-granting of RACP-MACP benefit despite the requisite years of service under the extant policy. Learned ASC for the opposite parties objected that no mandamus can issue absent demand and rejection. The Court did not adjudicate entitlement; it disposed of the writ petition reserving liberty to the petitioner to make an appropriate application, supported by necessary documents, to the concerned authorities within two weeks, with the Jurisdictional Authorities to decide and communicate the result within an outer limit of six weeks. All contentions were kept open, and the consideration is to be in the light of the coordinate Bench decision in Ashok Kumar Mohapatra -vrs.- State of Orissa (O.A.No.1668 of 2017, decided 09.10.2018, confirmed in W.P.(C) No.6698 of 2010 and further confirmed by the apex Court in SLP(C) No.15573 of 2020). Opposite Party Nos. 2 and 3 may seek information/documents needed for due consideration, but delay is not to be brooked. No costs.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C) No.20202 of 2025

Namita Hota

Petitioner

Mr.Dillip Kumar Mohapatra, Advocate

-versus-

State of Odisha & Others …. Opp. Parties

Mr.S.K. Jee, AGA

CORAM: JUSTICE DIXIT KRISHNA SHRIPAD

ORDER 17.10.2025

Order No.

02

The short grievance of the petitioner is as to nongranting of RACP-MACP benefit after he has put in a particular number of years of service under the extant policy. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, that benefit ought to have been granted to his client and not giving him is unjustified.

2. Learned ASC appearing for the O.Ps. submits that there cannot be a Mandamus, unless there is demand and rejection. The standard books of law, like the one by Justice B.L.Hansaria’s “Writ Jurisdiction” echo this.

3. In the above circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to make appropriate application to the concerned authorities, supported by necessary documents within two weeks and if such a representation is made, decision shall be taken by the Jurisdictional Authorities and result thereof shall be

Page 1 of 1

informed to the petitioner within an outer limit of six weeks. In that connection, all contentions of the parties are kept open. The consideration shall be in the light of the decision of a coordinate Bench of this Court in Ashok Kumar Mohapatra -vrs.- State of Orissa (O.A.No.1668 of 2017 disposed of vide judgment dated 09.10.2018 and confirmed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.6698 of 2010 and further confirmed by the apex Court in SLP(C) No.15573 of 2020.

It is open to Opp. Party Nos.2 & 3 to solicit any information or document from the side of the petitioner, as are required for due consideration of the subject representation; however in that guise, delay shall not be brooked.

Now, no costs.

Web copy of the order to be acted upon by all concerned.

( Dixit Krishna Shripad) Judge

Basu

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed Signed by: BASUDEV NAYAK Designation: ASST. REGISTRAR-CUM-SR. SECRETARY Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA : CUTTACK Date: 17-Oct-2025 16:18:08

Page 2 of 2