Disposed

Anita Nag v. State of of Odisha

Orissa HC10 Sept 2026WP(C)/28758/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought regular absorption and consequential benefits, citing her husband's long service. The Court directed the opposite party to consider the petitioner's representation within three months without expressing an opinion on merits, and disposed of the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Opposite Party No.2 to consider the representation filed by the Petitioner vide Annexure-14 within a period of three (3) months.

Anita Nag Vs State of of Odisha — Service and Employment | Orissa HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.28758 of 2026 CNR No. ODHC010662762026

¶3

Anita Nag

¶4

…. Petitioner Mr. S. K. Mishra, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha & Ors.

¶7

…. Opposite Parties Mr. P. K. Sahoo, ASC

¶8

CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

ORDER

Order No.

10.09.2026

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

¶13

2. Heard learned counsel for appearing for the Parties.

¶14

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

¶15

“Under the above circumstances, it is therefore humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be graciously pleased to direct the 0pp. Parties to absorb the petitioner on regular basis from the date of her engagement as a Peon i.e. from October, 2023, as her husband was continuing for last 22 years in the said post and the persons those who were appointed along with the husband of the petitioner have been absorbed regularly that and to grant him all consequential service and financial benefits.

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

4 . In course of hearing, learned counsel for the Petitioner states

¶19

// 2 //

¶20

that highlighting her grievance, Petitioner has made a representation to Opposite Party No.2 vide Annexure-14 and the same may be directed to be considered within a stipulated time, to which learned Counsel for the State has no objection.

¶21

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.2 to consider the representation filed by the Petitioner vide Annexure-14 within a period of three (3) months in accordance with law from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶22

Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

¶23

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge

¶24

Subrat/Utkalika

¶25

Signature Not Verified

¶26

Digitally Signed Signed by: UTKALIKA NAYAK Designation: Sr Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 11-Sep-2026 16:22:00

¶27

Page 2 of 2

Anita Nag v. State of of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anita Nag v. State of 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