Disposed¶21

Ashok Kumar Mohanty v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC5 Mar 2026WP(C)/6204/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Odisha High Court writ petition (W.P.(C) No.6204 of 2026) disposed of on consent basis without adjudicating merits; sole direction to Opposite Party No.4 to consider petitioner's Annexure-5 representation in accordance with law within 3 months of production of certified copy. Underlying grievance: non-release of differential arrear and 60% arrear pay fixation under ORSP Rule 2017, reference to letter dated 29.05.2025 (Annexure-4). Keywords: ORSP Rule 2017, arrear pay fixation, differential arrear, representation, dispose, three months, hybrid mode.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Opposite Party No.4 to consider the petitioner's representation vide Annexure-5 in accordance with law within a period of three (3) months from the date of production of certified copy of the order. ¶21

Ashok Kumar Mohanty Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.6204 of 2026

¶2

Ashok Kumar Mohanty

¶3

…. Petitioner Mr. M. Pati, Adv.

¶4

-versus-

¶5

State of Odisha & Ors.

¶6

…. Opposite Parties Mr. S.P. Das, ASC

¶7

COROM:

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

ORDER

05.03.2026

Order No

01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode.

¶13

2. Heard learned counsel for Petitioner and learned counsel for

¶14

the State-Opposite Parties.

¶15

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

¶16

“The petitioner therefore prays that your lordships may graciously be pleased to direct the Opp. Parties to release the differential arrear along with 60% arrear pay fixation under ORSP Rule 2017 taking into consideration the letter dated 29.05.2025 under Annexure-4 & representations under Annexure-5 within a stipulated time.

¶17

And pass such order/ directions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper. And for this act of kindness, the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.”

¶18

// 2 //

¶19

4. 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-5 and the same may be directed to be considered within a stipulated time, to which learned Counsel for the State has no objection.

¶20

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-5 in accordance with law within a period of three (3) months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶21

Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

¶22

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge

¶23

Jyoti

¶24

Signature Not Verified

¶25

Digitally Signed Signed by: JYOTIPRAVA BHOL Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORI SSA Date: 06-Mar-2026 15:09:30

¶26

Page 2 of 2

Ashok Kumar Mohanty v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Kumar Mohanty v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tikelal Kumbhar Vs State of Odisha

Pradip Kumar Behera Vs State of Odisha

Pinki Rath Vs Commissioner, Puri Muncipal Corporation, Puri

Sushri Sonali Mallik @ Arpita Vs Deputy Director, Aviation Research Centre, Cuttack

Ramachandra Rohidas Vs State of Odisha

Kamalesh Kumar Mohanty Vs Executive Engineer , Titilagarh Division, Bolangir, Tpcodl