Disposed

Susil Kumar Panda v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC11 Sept 2026WP(C)/28981/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The writ petition filed by a contractual driver challenging his discontinuance of services was disposed of without expression of opinion on merits. The Court directed the Opposite Parties to consider the petitioner's representation filed vide Annexure-8 within two months.

What did the court decide?

The Court directed Opposite Party No.2 to consider the petitioner's representation filed vide Annexure-8 within two months from the date of production of the certified copy of this order.

Susil Kumar Panda Vs State of Odisha — Service and Employment | Orissa HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.28981 of 2026

¶3

CNR No. ODHC010691202026

¶4

Susil Kumar Panda

¶5

Petitioner

¶6

Mr. P.K. Rout, Advocate

¶7

-versus-

¶8

State of Odisha & Ors.

¶9

…. Opposite Parties

¶10

Mr. S.P. Das, ASC

¶11

CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER

¶12

Order No.

¶13

10.09.2026

¶14

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

¶15

2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the Opp. Parties.

¶16

3. Petitioner has filed the present writ petition inter alia with the following prayer:-

¶17

“ In view of the facts and circumstances stated hereinabove, it is therefore most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to:

¶18

a) Admit and allow the present writ petition;

¶19

b) Set-aside the order dated 08.06.2026 at Annexure-9 directing for discontinuance of one Driver in Ganjam District where the petitioner is continuing.

¶20

c) Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Opposite Parties to permit the petitioner to resume and continue his duties as Contractual Driver in the District Excise Office, Ganjam.

¶21

// 2 //

¶22

d) Declare that the action of the Opposite Parties in discontinuing/preventing the petitioner from discharging his duties with effect from 01.05.2026, being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India;

¶23

e) Direct the Opposite Parties to treat the petitioner as continuing in service from 30.06.2026 and extend all consequential contractual benefits admissible to him, subject to the terms and conditions of his engagement;

¶24

f) Direct the Opposite Parties not to replace the petitioner by another similarly situated contractual/outsourced Driver so long as the requirement of such Driver continues and the services of similarly situated contractual Drivers are being retained;

¶25

Pass any other order(s), direction(s) or writ(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice and equity;

¶26

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

¶27

4 . In course of hearing, learned counsel for the Petitioner states that highlighting his grievance, Petitioner has made a representation to Opposite Party No.2 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.

¶28

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-8 within a period of two (2) months in

¶29

// 3 //

¶30

accordance with law from the date of production of certified copy of this order with due communication to the Petitioners.

¶31

6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

¶32

Subrat

¶33

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge

¶34

Signature Not Verified

¶35

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBRAT KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CU TTACK Date: 11-Sep-2026 15:07:33

¶36

Page 3 of 3

Susil Kumar Panda v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Susil Kumar Panda 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases