Manoj Kumar Panda Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Manoj Kumar Panda Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Opposite Party No.1 directed to consider the petitioner's representation (Annexure-6) within four weeks from production of certified copy of the order, if there is no other legal impediment, with due opportunity of hearing to all concerned; writ petition disposed without expression of opinion on merits.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to the benefits of the judgment dated 05.03.2020 passed in W.P.(C) No. 31679 of 2011, namely absorption as a regular teacher w.e.f. his date of engagement and release of financial benefits admissible to Sikhya Sahayaks w.e.f. his joining as Ganasikshaka. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

By consent of learned counsel for both sides, and after going through the records, the Court disposed of the Writ Petition without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.

Key takeaways

Opposite Party No.1 is directed to consider the petitioner's representation filed vide Annexure-6 within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of the order, if there is no other legal impediment, and by giving due opportunity of hearing to all concerned.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (W.P.(C) No.2600 of 2026, Manoj Kumar Panda v. State of Odisha and others), High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, decided 07.03.2026 by Aditya Kumar Mohapatra, Judge. The petitioner sought (i) the benefits of the judgment dated 05.03.2020 passed in W.P.(C) No. 31679 of 2011 — absorption as a regular teacher w.e.f. his date of engagement and release of financial benefits admissible to Sikhya Sahayaks w.e.f. his joining as Ganasikshaka — and (ii) quashing of Order No.1195/SME dated 01.07.2024 of the Block Education Officer, Odagaon (Annexure-5), described as mentioning him 'for notionally'. In course of hearing, counsel stated the petitioner had made a representation to Opposite Party No.1 vide Annexure-6 and asked that it be considered within a stipulated time, to which the State counsel had no objection. By consent, and without expressing any opinion on the merits, the Court disposed of the Writ Petition directing Opposite Party No.1 to consider the Annexure-6 representation within four weeks from production of a certified copy of the order, subject to absence of any other legal impediment, and by giving due opportunity of hearing to all concerned. No statute was cited; the substantive entitlement questions were expressly left unaddressed.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.2600 of 2026

Manoj Kumar Panda

.....

Petitioner

Represented by Adv. – Mr. Dilip Kumar Sahu

-versus-

State of Odisha and others

..... Opposite Parties

Represented by Adv. – Smt. Sasmita Nayak, ASC

CORAM:

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER

07.03.2026

Order No.

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

Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer:-

“In the therefore prays that this Honble Court may be graciously pleased to issue a rule NISI calling upon the opposite parties as to why petitioner shall not extend the benefits of the Judgement dtd. 05.03.2020 passed in W.P.(C) No. 31679 of 2011 i.e. to absorb the petitioner as regular teacher w.e.f. his date of engagement i.e. to release financial benefit admissible to Sikhya Sahayaks w.e.f. the date of Joining of the petitioner as Ganasikshaka after quashing where it was mention for notionally vide order No.1195/SME, dated 01.07.2024, issued by Block Education Officer, Odagaon under Annexure-5, within a stipulated time. If the opposite party fail to file show cause or show in sufficient cause the said rule be made absolute and

Page 1 of 1.

issue a Writ in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ directing the Opposite Parties to absorb the petitioner as regular teacher w.e.f. his date of engagement i.e. to release financial benefit admissible to Sikhya Sahayaks w.e.f. the date of Joining of the petitioner as Ganasikshaka after quashing where it was mention for notionally vide order No.1195/SME, dated 01.07.2024, issued by Block Education Officer, Odagaon under Annexure-5, within a stipulated time.

And, further be pleased to pass such other order/orders, direction/directions as deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice so as to give complete relief to the petitioner.”

In course of hearing, learned counsel for the Petitioner states that highlighting his grievance, the Petitioner has made a representation to Opposite Party No.1 vide Annexure-6 and the same may be directed to be considered within a stipulated time, to which learned counsel for the State has no objection.

As agreed by learned counsel for the parties and after going through the records, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, disposes of the Writ Petition directing Opposite Party No.1 to consider the representation filed by the Petitioner vide Annexure-6 within a period of four(4) weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order, if there is no other legal impediment and by giving due opportunity of hearing to all concerned.

(Aditya Kumar Mohapatra )

Judge

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed Signed by: DEBASIS AECH Debasis Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Date: 09-Mar-2026 11:41:08

Page 2 of 2.