Disposed¶30

Gokul Nayak v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC12 Mar 2026WP(C)/7580/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Gokul Nayak v. State of Odisha & Ors.; WP(C) No.7580 of 2026; High Court of Orissa at Cuttack; Justice Aditya Kumar Mohapatra; 12.03.2026; in-charge Headmaster; Government U.P. School, Kotagarh; senior most teacher; District Education Officer, Kandhamal; representation Annexure-4; speaking and reasoned order; eight weeks; disposed of at stage of admission; urgent certified copy.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Opposite Party No.3 (District Education Officer, Kandhamal) to consider the Petitioner's pending representation under Annexure-4 within eight weeks from production of certified copy of the order, dispose of it by passing a speaking and reasoned order, and communicate the decision to the Petitioner within ten days thereafter. ¶30

Gokul Nayak Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶30

Issue for consideration

Whether the Opposite Parties should be directed to allow the Petitioner, being the senior most teacher, to function as in-charge Headmaster of Government U.P. School, Kotagarh (prayer item I; not directly adjudicated by this Court). +1 more

¶20

Ratio / Principle

Considering the limited nature of the Petitioner's grievance, the writ application is disposed of at the stage of admission with a direction to Opposite Party No.3 to consider the Petitioner's representation under Annexure-4 within eight weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶27

Key takeaways

Opposite Party No.3 is directed to dispose of the Petitioner's representation under Annexure-4 by passing a speaking and reasoned order.ratio¶27
The decision taken by Opposite Party No.3 is to be communicated to the Petitioner within ten days thereafter.ratio¶29

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

WP(C) No.7580 of 2026, High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, decided 12.03.2026 (Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aditya Kumar Mohapatra) - Gokul Nayak v. State of Odisha & Ors. The Petitioner, claiming to be the senior most teacher of Government U.P. School, Kotagarh, prayed to be allowed to function as in-charge Headmaster, for action against the erring Headmaster, and for compensation for mental agony; his representation (Annexure-4) before the District Education Officer, Kandhamal (Opposite Party No.3) was pending. With the concurrence of the Additional Standing Counsel for the State, the Court disposed of the writ application at the stage of admission, directing Opposite Party No.3 to consider the representation under Annexure-4 within eight weeks from production of certified copy of the order, to dispose of it by passing a speaking and reasoned order, and to communicate the decision to the Petitioner within ten days thereafter. The substantive grievances (in-charge Headmaster posting, action against erring Headmaster, compensation) were not adjudicated by this Court and were left to the consideration of Opposite Party No.3.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.7580 of 2026

¶2

Gokul Nayak

¶3

..... Petitioner

¶4

Represented By Adv. – P.K. Mohapatra

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State Of Odisha & Ors.

¶7

.....

¶8

Opposite Parties

¶9

Represented By Adv. – C.M. Singh, ASC

¶10

CORAM:

¶11

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

ORDER

12.03.2026

Order No.

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

¶17

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ application as well as the documents annexed thereto.

¶18

The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the following prayer:

¶19

“xxx xxx xxx

¶20

“I) Direct the Opposite Parties to allow the Petitioner being the senior most teacher to function as in-charge Headmaster of Government U.P. School, Kotagarh;

¶21

II) Direct the District Education Officer, Kandhamal to take appropriate action against the erring Headmaster for violation of Government guidelines and thereby

¶22

Page 1 of 3.

¶23

quash the action/order by which the charge of In-charge Headmaster has been illegally handed over to a junior teacher and grant compensation for mental agony, humiliation and harassment suffered by the Petitioner.

¶24

xxx xxx xxx”

¶25

In course of hearing of the writ application, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner ventilating his grievance has submitted representation before the District Education Officer, Kandhamal, Phulbani, Opposite Party No.3 under Annexure-4. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the said representation is pending as of now. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that a direction be issued to the Opposite Party No.3 to consider the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-4 within a stipulated period of time.

¶26

Learned Additional Govt. Advocate submits that he has no objection if the representation of the Petitioner is considered by the Opposite Party No.3, which is stated to be pending, in accordance with law within a stipulated period of time.

¶27

Considering the limited nature of grievance of the Petitioner, the writ application is disposed of at the stage of admission with a direction to the Opposite Party No.3 to consider the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-4 within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. The Opposite Party No.3 shall do well to dispose of the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-4 by passing a speaking and reasoned order. The decision so taken by the Opposite Party No.3 be also communicated to the

¶28

Page 2 of 3.

¶29

Petitioner within ten days thereafter.

¶30