Sudam Charan Pradhani v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC12 Nov 2025WP(C)/31078/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Odisha High Court, Cuttack; W.P.(C) No.31078 of 2025; Sudam Charan Pradhani v. State of Odisha & Others; single judge (Dixit Krishna Shripad, J.); deemed promotion; Head Pandit; post facto approval; financial benefit of promotion; representation dated 06.09.2025 (Annexure-5); Promotion Order No.3302 dated 14.07.1994; Order No.6496 dated 20.12.1997; direction to consider representation within eight weeks; contentions kept open; costs warning for delay; retirement details referred; no statute or precedent cited; merits not decided.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Opposite Party Nos. 2 & 3 to consider the petitioner's representation dated 06.09.2025 and inform him of the result within eight weeks; all contentions kept open; liberty to solicit requisite information/documents; no costs. ¶¶17

Sudam Charan Pradhani Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶17

Issue for consideration

Whether Opposite Party Nos. 2 & 3 should consider the petitioner's representation dated 06.09.2025 seeking deemed promotion as Head Pandit w.e.f. 14.07.1994 with post facto approval and consequential financial benefits.

¶¶13

Court's answer

Petition disposed of with a direction that the subject representation be considered and the result of such consideration communicated to the petitioner within eight weeks; all contentions of the parties kept open.

¶¶17

Ratio / Principle

The authorities may solicit any information or documents required for due consideration of the representation, but delay in doing so will not be brooked; if brooked, it will be viewed very seriously and may attract heavily imposed costs personally payable at the next level of legal battle.

¶¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

W.P.(C) No.31078 of 2025 (High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, Dixit Krishna Shripad, J., order dated 12.11.2025): The petitioner's short grievance was non-consideration of his representation dated 06.09.2025 (Annexure-5) praying for deemed promotion from the date of Promotion Order No.3302 dated 14.07.1994 instead of treatment as Head Pandit per Order No.6496 dated 20.12.1997, with post facto approval w.e.f. 14.07.1994 and financial benefits. Learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned ASC did not much dispute that the representation should meet its fate at the hands of OP Nos.2 & 3 on merits within a reasonable period, ordinarily eight weeks. Petition disposed of: OP Nos.2 & 3 directed to consider the representation and inform the petitioner of the result within eight weeks; all contentions kept open; liberty to solicit information/documents, with a warning that delay will be viewed very seriously and may attract heavy personally payable costs; no costs. No adjudication on the merits of the promotion claim.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.31078 of 2025

¶3

SUDAM CHARAN PRADHANI

¶4

…. Petitioner

¶5

Mr. D. Dash, Advocate

¶6

-Versus-

¶7

STATE OF ODISHA & OTHERS …. Opposite Parties Mr. J.K. Khandayatray, ASC

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

JUSTICE DIXIT KRISHNA SHRIPAD

ORDER

Order No. 01.

12.11.2025

The short grievance of the petitioner is as to nonconsideration of the representation dated 06.09.2025 at Annexure-5, wherein the last paragraph reads as under:

¶14

“So, we pray you kindly to deemed our promotion from the date of issue of Promotion order vide Order No.3302 dtd. 14.07.1994 instead of treating as Head Pandit as per order No. 6496 dtd. 20.12.1997, treating Head Pandit as per order dtd. 20.12.1997 has put us in financial loss accrued on promotion w.e.f. 14.07.1994, for which we pray you further to accord post facto approval w.e.f. 14.07.1994 and give us financial benefit accrued on promotion to the post of Head Pandit w.e.f. 14.07.1994 because the Head Pandit post was vacant then, for which we shall be grateful to you. The details of our retairment has been stated in the back or the base which may kindly be perused.”(sic)

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits and leaned ASC, who, on request, accepts notice for the OPs does not much dispute that the subject representation should meet its fate at the hands of OP Nos.2 & 3 on merits and in a reasonable period, which is eight weeks ordinarily.

¶16

Page 1 of 2

¶17

In the above circumstances, petition is disposed off. Period for consideration of subject representation and informing result of such consideration to the petitioner, is eight weeks. All contentions of the parties are kept open.

¶18

It is open to solicit any information or document from side of the petitioner or from other officers, as are required for due consideration of the subject application; however, in that guise delay shall not be brooked. If brooked, delay shall be viewed very seriously and at the next level of legal battle cost may be heavily imposed, as personally payable.

¶19

Now, no costs.

¶20

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

¶21

( Dixit Krishna Shripad ) Judge

¶22

Prasant

¶23

Signature Not Verified

¶24

Digitally Signed Signed by: PRASANT KUMAR SAHOO Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 13-Nov-2025 18:53:39

¶25

Page 2 of 2

Sudam Charan Pradhani v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudam Charan Pradhani v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gokul Charan Das Vs State of Odisha

Pravat Kumar Mandal Vs State of Orissa

Dibya Sundar Das Vs State of Odisha

Akhil Chandra Sabar Vs State of Odisha

Sripati Agasti Vs State of Odisha

Gangaram Dash Vs State of Odisha