Geetarani Mohanty Vs State of Odisha

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ application as well as the documents annexed thereto.

¶16

The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the following prayer:

¶17

“Under the above circumstances, it is therefore humbly prayed that the Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to direct the opp. Parties to approve the appointment of the petitioners and release the grant in aid under the provision of GIA Order, 1994 as recommended by the institution as his case is squarely covered by the ratio decided in FAO No. 509 of 2014 which was disposed of on 19.03.2025 and in alternative direct opp. party No.2 to take a decision on the representation of the petitioner under Annexure-4 , within a stipulated period;

¶18

And/or pass any other appropriate writ/writs, order/orders and direction/directions in the fitness of the case;

¶19

And for which act of kindness, the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.”

¶20

Learned counsel for the Petitioners at the outset contended that the present Petitioners who stand in a similar footing with the Appellant in FAO No.509 of 2014, which was disposed of by a Coordinate Bench on 19.03.2025 and eventually upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, claims similar benefits at par with the Appellant in FAO No.509 of 2014. He further contended that claiming similar benefits the Petitioners have already approached the Opposite Party No.2 by filing a detailed representation dated 24.11.2025 at Annexure-4 to the writ petition. He further submitted that since no decision has been taken on the representation of the Petitioners even though several months have elapsed in the meantime. Challenging such inaction of the Opposite Party No.2 the Petitioners have approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.

¶21

Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that since the issue involved in the present writ petition is release of GIA, the present writ petition is not maintainable. He further contended that in the event the Petitioners have approached the Opposite Party No.2 and their grievance is still pending before the Opposite Party No.2, he will have no objection if this Court directs the Opposite Party No.2 to take a lawful decision on such representation within a stipulated period of time.

¶22

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties, on a careful analysis of their submission and on a close scrutiny of the document annexed to the writ petition, this Court observes that the sole grievance of the Petitioners in the present writ petition is the inaction of the Opposite Party No.2 to take a decision on their representation dated 24.11.2025 which is stated to be pending before the Opposite Party No.2 for consideration. Taking into consideration the aforesaid factual scenario, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ

¶23

petition by directing the Opposite Party No.2 to consider and dispose of the representation of the Petitioners in view of the judgments of this Court as well as the Hon’ble Supreme Court within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of a certified copy of today’s order. It is needless to mention here that the claim of the Petitioners shall be governed by the judgment of this Court as has been affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. It is further directed that the Opposite Party No.2 shall do well to dispose of the representation of the Petitioner by passing a speaking and reasoned order. The final decision so taken be communicated to the Petitioner within ten days thereafter.

¶24

With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ application stands disposed of.

¶25

Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.

¶26

( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra ) Judge

¶27

Sisir

¶28

Page 3 of 3.

¶29

Signature Not Verified

¶30

Digitally Signed Signed by: SISIR KUMAR SETHI Designation: PERSONAL ASSISTANT Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Date: 25-May-2026 13:07:20

Geetarani Mohanty v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Geetarani Mohanty 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

Managing Committee of Karapada High School Vs State of Odisha

Trinath Pradhan Vs State of Odisha

Subham Dalei Vs State of Odisha

Sudhadeb @ Sudhadev Behera Vs State of Odisha

Nilaratna Sahu Vs State of Odisha

Sukanta Chandra Panigrahi Vs State of Odisha