Orissa High Court
Dhanamati Sikha vs State Of Odisha & Ors. .... Opposite ... on 26 June, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.15139 of 2025
Dhanamati Sikha .... Petitioner
Mr. D.K. Sahu, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha & Ors. .... Opposite Parties
Mr. C.K. Pradhan, AGA
COROM:
JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
ORDER
Order No 26.06.2025
01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode.
2. Heard learned counsel for Petitioner and learned counsel for
the State-Opposite Parties.
3. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia with the
following prayer:-
"In the therefore prays that this Hon'ble Court may
graciously pleased to issue a rule NISI calling upon
the opposite parties as to why petitioner shall not
extend the benefit of Sikshya Sahayak as per the
Judgement dated. 05.03.2020 passed in W.P.(C) No.
31679 of 2011 Dhananjay Charan Dey & Others-
Vrs- State of Orissa and Bishnu Naik and others-Vrs-
State Of Odisha in W.A. No.524 of 2024, ie. to
absorb the petitioner as Sikshya Sahayak from date
of engagement, pursuant to resolution dated.
16.02.2008 and given all the consequential service
benefits of regular teacher after completion Six years
of Service within a stipulated time. If the opposite
party fail to file show cause or show in sufficient
cause this Hon'ble would be made absolute the said
rule and issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or
// 2 //
any other appropriate Writ directing the Opposite
Parties to absorb the petitioners as Sikshya Sahayak
w.c.f. his date of engagement, pursuant to resolution
doted. 16.02.2008 and to extend all the consequential
service benefits of regular teacher after completion
Six years of Service in the light judgment of
Dhanjaya Charan Dey-Ves- State of Orissa and
Bishnu Naik and others-Vrs-State Of Odisha, within
a stipulated time.
And, further be pleased to pass such other
order/orders, direction/directions as deemed fit and
proper in the interest of Justice so as to give
complete relief to the petitioner and, for the act of
kindness, the petitioner as in duty bound to shall ever
pray."
4. In course of hearing, learned counsel for the Petitioner states
that highlighting his grievances, the Petitioner has made a
representation to Opposite Party No.1 vide Annexure-7 and the
same may be directed to be considered within a stipulated time, to
which learned Counsel for the State has no objection.
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.1 to consider the representation filed by the
petitioner vide Annexure-7 within a period of three (3) months from
the date of production of certified copy of this order.
Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.
Digitally Signed (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy)
Reason: Authentication Judge
JyotiCOURT OF ORISSA
Location: HIGH
Date: 26-Jun-2025 17:18:26
