Writ petition challenging rejection of the petitioner's RACP benefit claim on the ground that his service book lacked an entry showing passing of the Departmental Examination. The court relied on a government notification showing he had passed and remitted the matter to Opposite Party No.1 for fresh decision within two months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.9350 of 2024
Binaya Bhusan Mishra
…. Petitioner Mr. S.K. Ojha, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha & Ors. …. Opposite Parties Mr. S.P. Das, ASC
CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
ORDER
Order No.
12.11.2025
02. 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 order dtd.12.02.2024 so issued by the B.D.O, Anandapur-Opposite Party No.3 under Annexure-12. Vide the said order, claim of the Petitioner to get the benefit of RACP has been rejected on the ground that in the service book of the Petitioner there is no entry, showing passing of the Departmental Examination.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that Petitioner has passed the examination in question vide Notification issued by the Government in the Panchyatiraj and D.W. Department on 29.01.2021 under Annexure-13. However, since the said fact was not entered in the service book of the Petitioner, on that ground only, Petitioner’s claim has been rejected.
// 2 //
4.1 . It is accordingly contended that taking into account the Notification issued under Annexure-13 showing passing of the Departmental Examination by the Petitioner, the matter be remitted to Opposite Party No.1 to take a fresh decision on the Petitioner’s claim to get the benefit of RACP.
5. Even though notice of the Writ Petition has been issued since 22.04.2024, but no counter affidavit has been filed. However, it is contended that since the passing of the Examination by the Petitioner so notified on 29.01.2021 under Annexure-13 has not been reflected in the service book of the Petitioner, no illegality or irregularity can be found with the impugned rejection.
6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties, considering the submissions made and since it is found that claim of the Petitioner to get the benefit of RACP has been rejected only on the ground that he has not passed the Departmental Examination, this Court taking into account the notification issued under Annexure-13 and the contention of the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner that vide the said notification, Petitioner has passed the Departmental Examination, this Court remits the matter to Opposite Party No.1 to take a fresh decision with regard to entitlement of the Petitioner to get the benefit of RACP, taking into account the notification issued under Annexure-13. This Court directs Opposite Party No.1 to take a fresh decision within a period of two (2) months from
Page 2 of 3
// 3 //
the date of receipt of this order with due communication to the Petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands 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 3 of 3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of RACP despite absence of a service book entry showing passing of the Departmental Examination, given the notification under Annexure-13.
Binaya Bhusan Mishra
State of Odisha
B.D.O, Anandapur
Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
