Disposed

Suryakanta Mallik v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC10 Sept 2026WP(C)/28073/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Writ Petitioner filed a petition seeking directions to the opposite party to dispose of a Rehabilitation Appointment Application within a stipulated time and issue a favorable appointment order. The Court directed the opposite party to consider and dispose of the application under Annexure-5 within three months without expressing an opinion on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Directed Opposite Party No. 3 to consider and dispose of the Petitioner's application under Annexure-5 within three months with due communication.

Suryakanta Mallik Vs State of Odisha — Service and Employment | Orissa HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP (C ) No.28073 of 2026 CNR No. ODHC010620742026

¶2

Suryakanta Mallik …. Petitioner Mr. A.K. Ray, Adv.

¶3

-versus-

¶4

State of Odisha and Others

¶5

…. Opposite Parties Mr. A. Tripathy, AGA

¶6

CORAM:

¶7

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

ORDER

10.09.2026

Order No.

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

¶12

2. Heard learned counsel for appearing for the Parties.

¶13

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

¶14

Therefore the petitioner most respectfully prays that your Lordships would graciously be pleased to admit the case, issue notice to the opp. parties and after hearing from the both parties allow the writ Petition to the following extend:

¶15

(i) May be pleased to direct the Opp Party No.3 to dispose of the Rehabilitation Appointment Application/Annexure-5 within a stipulated time period.

¶16

(ii) May further be pleased to direct the Opp. Party No.3 to issue appointment order in favour of the Petitioner taking into consideration of Annexure-7.

¶17

(iii) And pass any other order/orders, direction/directions as it would be deemed fit and proper to the facts and circumstances of

¶18

// 2 //

¶19

the case in order to provide complete justice to the Petitioner.

¶20

And for which act of kindness the Petitioner r as in duty bound shall ever pray.

¶21

4 . In course of hearing, learned counsel for the Petitioner states that even though, Petitioner has made an application so available at Annexure-5 to the Writ Petition, to get the benefit of appointment under the Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme before Opposite Party No.3, but the same is yet to be considered and disposed of. It is accordingly contended that Opp. Party No.3 be directed to consider and dispose of the application within a stipulated time period to which learned Counsel for the State has no objection.

¶22

5. 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, dispose of the Writ Petition with a direction on Opposite Party No.3 to consider and dispose of the application made by the Petitioner under Annexure-5 in accordance with law, within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of this order with due communication to the Petitioner.

¶23

6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

¶24

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge

Sangita

Page 2 of 3

// 3 //

Signature Not Verified

¶29

Digitally Signed Signed by: SANGITA PATRA Reason: AUTHENTICATION OF ORDER Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CU TTACK Date: 11-Sep-2026 19:48:12

¶30

Page 3 of 3

Suryakanta Mallik v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suryakanta Mallik v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases