Manoranjan Mohapatra Vs State of Orissa — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Manoranjan Mohapatra Vs State of Orissa — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of with direction that the State Opposite Parties consider the petitioner's representation dated 10.09.2024 (Annexure-8) in accordance with law within three months and communicate the result; petitioner at liberty to furnish a fresh copy of the representation immediately; Opp. Party No.1 may call for requisite documents/information without permitting delay; all contentions kept open; no costs; web copy of the order to be acted upon by all concerned.

Issue for consideration

Whether the public authorities are bound to consider the grievances aired by citizens in their representations and grant redressal in accordance with the extant Rules, as urged with reference to Article 350, in respect of the petitioner's representation dated 10.09.2024 (Annexure-8). +1 more

Court's answer

Accepting the learned AGA's undertaking that the official Opposite Parties would look into the grievance aired in the subject representation in accordance with law in a time-bound way, the writ petition is disposed of: time fixed for consideration and communication of the result to the petitioner is three months, and all contentions of the parties are kept open.

Ratio / Principle

Opposite Party No.1 is free to solicit any information or documents from the side of the petitioner as required for due consideration of the subject representation, but no delay will be permitted on that account.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

W.P.(C) No.28280 of 2025 (High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, Dixit Krishna Shripad, J.; order dated 27.10.2025) - Manoranjan Mohapatra v. State of Odisha & Others. The petitioner, working as Reader (State Scale) in History in a fully aided educational institution, complained of the State Opposite Parties' inaction in extending placement benefits - Lecturer (Group-A) scale w.e.f. 01.06.1997 and Reader (State Scale) w.e.f. 01.06.2007, after completion of 08 and 18 years of service from receipt of Grant-in-aid - invoking Rule 4(1) of the Odisha Non-government aided college Lecturer's Placement Rules, 2014, the decision in Chittaranjan Das v. State of Odisha (2023 (II) ILR-Cut-1194) and Dolamani Meher (W.P.(C) No.4312 of 2016 batch, disposed 06.07.2023), and seeking modification of Govt. Notification dt.24.06.2017; counsel relied on the representation dated 10.09.2024 (Annexure-8) and urged the Article 350 mandate to consider citizens' representations. Learned AGA undertook to have the State examine the grievance in accordance with law in a time-bound way. Disposing of the writ petition, the Court fixed three months for consideration and communication of the result, kept all contentions open, permitted furnishing of a fresh copy of the representation, allowed Opp. Party No.1 to solicit documents without brooking delay, and made no order as to costs.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C) No.28280 of 2025

Manoranjan Mohapatra

…. Petitioner

Mr. R. Samal, Advocate

-Versus-

State of Odisha & Others

…. Opposite Parties

Mr. D. Lenka, AGA

CORAM:

JUSTICE DIXIT KRISHNA SHRIPAD

ORDER

Order No.

27.10.2025

01.

The petitioner has sensitively stated his entire case in an

appreciable way in the synopsis, which reads as under :-

“That petitioner, who was working as Reader (State Scale) in History in a fully aided educational institution is constrained to file this writ application challenging the inaction of the StateOpp.Parties in not extending the benefit for placement in Lecturer (Group-A) scale of pay, as well as Reader (State Scale) respectively w.e.f, dt.01.06.1997 & dt.Ol.06.2007 respectively i.e. after completion of 08 years and 18 years of service from the date of receipt of Grant-in-aid as per the law decided by this Hon'ble Court in the case of Chittaranjan Das Vrs. State Of Odisha & Ors. Reported in 2023 (II) ILR-Cut-1194, so also the similar judgment passed in the case of Dolamani Meher and batch Vrs. State of Odisha & Ors.(W.P.(C) No.4312 Of 2016 and batch disposed on 06.07.2023), keeping in view provision provided under Rule-4(1) of the Odisha Non-government aided college Lecturer's Placement Rules, 2014 (hereinafter referred as "2014 Rules") by modifying the Govt. Notification dt.24.06.2017 in so far as it relates to the present petitioner is concerned. It is submitted that though this Hon'ble Court while adjudicating the similar issue in the case of Chittaranjan Das and Dolamani Meher & batch (supra) has already laid down the law which has been implemented in the meantime and the petitioner who stand on the same footing and also made several grievances before the authorities with a request to extend the similar benefits as per the aforesaid principle decided

Page 1 of 3

by this Hon'ble Court, but till date the State-Opp.Parties are sitting tight over the matter without any valid reason, for which the petitioner finding no other alternative, except to approach this Hon'ble Court by filing the present writ application. Hence this Writ Application.”

Learned counsel for the petitioner draws attention of the Court to the representation dated 10.09.2024, a copy whereof avails at Annexure-8, ventilating his grievance. He submits that there is a constitutional mandate enacted in Article 350, which directs that the Public Authorities have to consider the grievances aired by the citizens in their representations and grant redressal in accordance with the extant Rules. Further he says that this having not happened inevitably, he is knocking at the doors of the Writ Court.

Learned A.G.A. appearing for the official Opp. Parties opposed the writ petition for some time and now, he submits that he would instruct his client to look into the grievance of the petitioner, as has been aired in the subject representation in accordance with law and in a time-bound way and this Court keeps open all contentions. Learned counsel for the petitioner is agreeable with the same. I too cotton with it.

In the above circumstances, the writ petition is disposed off. Time for consideration and communication of result of such consideration to the petitioner is three months. All contentions are kept open. It is open to the petitioner to give a copy of the representation afresh immediately.

It is open to Opp. Party No.1 to solicit any information or document from the side of the petitioner, as are required for due

Page 2 of 3

consideration of the subject representation; however in that guise, delay shall not be brooked.

Now, no costs.

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

( Dixit Krishna Shripad ) Judge

Prasant

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed Signed by: PRASANT KUMAR SAHOO Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 28-Oct-2025 17:54:51

Page 3 of 3