Disposed

Ananta Mirdha v. the Govt. of Odisha, Bbsr

Orissa HC10 Sept 2026WP(C)/28723/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge disposed of the Writ Petition directing Opposite Party No.4 to consider the petitioner's representation regarding MACP of financial upgradation for completing 20 years of service within three months, without expressing an opinion on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Opposite Party No.4 to consider the representation filed by the petitioner vide Annexure-8 within three months.

Ananta Mirdha Vs the Govt. of Odisha, Bbsr — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Orissa HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 28723 of 2026 CNR No.ODHC010652862026

¶2

Ananta Mirdha ..... Petitioner Mr. K.C. Ratha, Advocate -versus- The Govt. of Odisha, BBSR & ..... Opposite Parties Ors. Mr. S.P. Das, ASC

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER

¶5

10.09.2026

¶6

Order No. 01

¶7

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for Petitioner and learned counsel for the State-Opposite Parties.

¶9

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

¶10

“The Petitioner, therefore, most humbly prays to issue Notice to the Opposite Parties to furnish suitable Show Cause and in absence of any such suitable Show Cause, this Hon'ble Court further be pleased to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other suitable Writ/Writs directing the Opposite Parties to allow MACP of financial upgradation for the completion of 20 years of service from the year 2020. Or representation may be disposed of within stipulated period.

¶11

And the Petitioners may kindly be allowed to get all Service Consequential and Financial benefits.

¶12

And any other Order/Orders direction/directions may be passed.

¶13

Page 1 of 2.

¶14

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

¶15

In course of hearing, learned counsel for the Petitioner state that highlighting his grievances, the Petitioner has made a representation to Opposite Party No.4 vide Annexure-8 and the same may be directed to be considered within a stipulated time, to which learned Counsel for the State has no objection.

¶16

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, disposes of the Writ Petition directing Opposite Party No.4 to consider the representation filed by the petitioner vide Annexure-8 in accordance with law within a period of three (3) months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶17

Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

¶18

(BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge

¶19

Jyoti

¶20

Signature Not Verified

¶21

Digitally Signed Signed by: JYOTIPRAVA BHOL Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORI SSA Date: 11-Sep-2026 11:10:39

¶22

Page 2 of 2.

Ananta Mirdha v. the Govt. of Odisha, Bbsr

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ananta Mirdha v. the Govt. of Odisha, Bbsr

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases