Allowed¶26

Akshaya Kumar Biswal v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC10 Mar 2026FAO/472/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Orissa High Court, FAO No.472 of 2025, decided 10.03.2026 by Justice Aditya Kumar Mohapatra. Grant-in-aid appeal under Section 24-C, Orissa Education (Amendment) Act, 1998 against State Education Tribunal's rejection (order dated 30.08.2025, GIA Case No.18 of 2021) based on State of Odisha v. Anup Kumar Senapati; Tribunal order set aside and matter remanded for fresh adjudication since a coordinate bench (FAO No.509 of 2014, Ratnakar Mohapatra, 19.03.2025) distinguished Senapati and the Supreme Court affirmed that view (SLP(C) No.6592 of 2026, Jagannath Dixit; SLP(C) Diary No.71468 of 2025, Khali Apsara High School). FAO allowed.

What did the court decide?

Impugned Tribunal order dated 30.08.2025 in GIA Case No.18 of 2021 set aside; matter remanded to the State Education Tribunal for fresh adjudication. ¶26

Akshaya Kumar Biswal Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Impugned Tribunal order dated 30.08.2025 in GIA Case No.18 of 2021 set aside; matter remanded to the State Education Tribunal for fresh adjudication.

¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether the State Education Tribunal's order dated 30.08.2025 in GIA Case No.18 of 2021, rejecting the appellant's grant-in-aid prayer at the admission stage by following State of Odisha v. Anup Kumar Senapati, should be set aside and the matter reconsidered, given that a coordinate bench of this Court has distinguished Anup Kumar Senapati and the Supreme Court has affirmed that coordinate-bench view.

¶25

Court's answer

The judgment in Anup Kumar Senapati has been distinguished by a coordinate bench of this Court in an identical matter and that coordinate-bench judgment has already been affirmed by the Supreme Court; accordingly, the dispute involved in the present appeal requires reconsideration by the State Education Tribunal.

¶25

Ratio / Principle

The impugned order dated 30.08.2025 passed in GIA Case No.18 of 2021 is set aside.

¶25

Key takeaways

The matter is remanded back to the State Education Tribunal for fresh adjudication in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.ratio¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

FAO under Section 24-C of the Orissa Education (Amendment) Act, 1998 challenging order dated 30.08.2025 of the State Education Tribunal in GIA Case No.18 of 2021, whereby the appellant's prayer for release of grant-in-aid was rejected at the admission stage following State of Odisha v. Anup Kumar Senapati. Counsel showed that a coordinate bench of this Court in FAO No.509 of 2014 (State of Odisha v. Ratnakar Mohapatra, common judgment dated 19.03.2025) had distinguished Anup Kumar Senapati, and that the State's batch of SLPs (lead matter State of Odisha v. Jagannath Dixit, SLP(C) No.6592 of 2026) was dismissed by the Supreme Court on 13.02.2026 relying on its judgment dated 23.01.2026 in State of Odisha v. Managing Committee of Khali Apsara High School (SLP(C) Diary No.71468 of 2025). Holding: Anup Kumar Senapati having been distinguished in an identical matter and the coordinate-bench view affirmed by the Supreme Court, the dispute requires reconsideration; the impugned Tribunal order is set aside and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication. FAO allowed.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK FAO No.472 of 2025

¶2

Akshaya Kumar Biswal

¶3

.....

¶4

Appellant

¶5

Represented by Adv. - Sangram Jena

¶6

-versus-

¶7

State of Odisha & Ors.

¶8

..... Respondents

¶9

Represented by Adv. 3 Sasmita Nayak, A.S.C.

¶10

CORAM:

¶11

THE HON9BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

ORDER

10.03.2026

Order No.

This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode).

¶17

Heard learned counsel for the Appellant as well as learned counsel for the Respondent-State. Perused the Appeal and the documents annexed thereto.

¶18

The present FAO has been filed under Section 24-C of the Orissa Education (Amendment) Act, 1998 thereby challenging order dated 30.08.2025 passed by the learned State Education Tribunal in GIA Case No.18 of 2021.

¶19

Learned counsel for the Appellant at the outset contended that the appellant initially moved an application before the State Education Tribunal with a prayer for release of grant-in-aid in his favor. Such application was taken up by the learned Education Tribunal and by virtue of an order dated 30.08.2025, at Annexure2, the GIA Case No.18 of 2021 was disposed of at the stage of

¶20

Page 1 of 3.

¶21

admission by the learned Tribunal and the prayer for the Petitioner was rejected following the judgment in the case of State of Odisha vs. Anup Kumar Senapati . Learned counsel for the petitioner further contented that challenging such order, the petitioner has preferred this FAO. He further contented that in the meantime, the judgment in Anup Kumar Senapati 9s case ( supra ) has been distinguished by a coordinate bench of this court in FAO No.509 of 2014 in State of Odisha and Another vs Ratnakar Mohapatra and Another and a batch of similar other writ application disposed of vide a common judgment dated 19.03.2025. He further submitted that relying the judgment in Ratnakar Mahapatra 9s case ( supra ), the learned Coordinate Bench has disposed of many similar applications and in one such application, the State preferred batch of SLPs before the Hon9ble Supreme Court, the lead matter being State of Odisha & Another vs. Jagannath Dixit & Another in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.6592 of 2026. The Hon9ble Supreme Court vide order dated 13.02.2026 dismissed the State9s SLP relying upon another judgment dated 23.01.2026 passed by a Coordinate Bench of the Hon9ble Supreme Court in the State of Odisha and Others v. Managing Committee of Khali Apsara High School in SLP(C) Diary No.71468 of 2025.

¶22

Learned counsel for the State-Respondent on the other hand objected to the prayer made in the present appeal. She further submitted that the prayer of the petitioner has been rejected by the learned Tribunal by following the judgment in Anup Kumar Senapati 9s case.

¶23

Having regard to the submissions made by counsels appearing for both sides and on careful examination of the

¶24

Page 2 of 3.

¶25

background facts as well as taking into consideration the judgment relied upon by both sides, this Court is of the considered view that the judgment in Anup Kumar Senapati has been distinguished by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in an identical matter and such judgment of the Coordinate Bench has already been affirmed by the Hon9ble Supreme Court. In such view of the matter, the dispute involved in the present appeal requires reconsideration by the State Education Tribunal. Accordingly, this Court has no hesitation in setting aside the impugned order dated 30.08.2025 passed in GIA Case No.18 of 2021. Accordingly, the same is hereby set aside. Further, the matter is remanded back to the State Education Tribunal for fresh adjudication of the matter in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.

¶26

With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the FAO stands allowed.

¶27

( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge

¶28

Anil

¶29

Signature Not Verified

¶30

Page 3 of 3.

¶31

Digitally Signed Signed by: ANIL KUMAR SAHOO Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 11-Mar-2026 18:13:42

Akshaya Kumar Biswal v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akshaya Kumar Biswal 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jayashree Kumari Devi Vs Puspa Kumari Devi

Mohan Kumar Durit Vs State of Odisha

Rabindra Kumar Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Siba Sindriya Vs State of Odisha

Bira Kishore Mishra Vs State of Odisha

Chitrasen Samantaray Vs Nilamani Paikray