[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Nabakishore Pahadasingh vs ) State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Parties on 15 April, 2026
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.14687 of 2025
Nabakishore Pahadasingh ..... Petitioner
Represented by Adv. -
Banshidhar Satapathy
-versus-
1) state of odisha ..... Opposite Parties
2) Director, Secondary Education, Represented by Adv. -
BBSR
3) District Education Officer, Khurda Mr. C.M. Singh, ASC
4) Headmaster cum Secy. ,Managing M/s. Chitta Ranjan Mishra,
Committee , Padmacharan Vidyapitha, S.S. Samantray
Khurda
CORAM:
MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA
ORDER
15.04.2026
Order No.
02. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.
2. Mr. Chitta Ranjan Mishra and his associates files
Vakalatnama on behalf of Opposite Party No.4 in Court. The same
be taken on record. Registry is directed indicating the names as
counsel for the Opposite Party No.4 in the cause list as well as in the
brief.
3. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned
Additional Standing Counsel for the State and Mr. Chitta Ranjan
Mishra, learned counsel appearing for Opposite Party No.4. Perused
the writ application as well as the documents annexed thereto.
4. The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner with
the following prayers:-
"In the facts and circumstances of the case the
humble petitioner fervently prays this Hon'ble Court to
be graciously pleased to issue notice to the 0pp.
parties, call for relevant records and after hearing the
Counsel of parties, issue a writ in the nature of
Mandamus or any appropriate writ quashing the
impugned order No. 37559 dtd. 31.12.2024 under
Annexure-1, and commanding 0pp. parties particularly
to the Opp.party No.2, the Director Secondary
Education, Odisha to approve the proposal sent by the
Managing Committee vide Resolution No. 26 dtd.
26.03.2023 with regard to correction of date of birth of
the petitioner in the service book as 06.03.1974 as
mentioned in the HSC Madhyama Certificate instead of
20.05.1966 within a stipulated time.
And / or pass such other order or direction as
deems fit and proper in the interest of justice;
And for this act of your kindness, the humble
petitioner shall as in duty bound, ever pray."
5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at the outset, contended
that the issue involved in the present writ application was directly
and substantially is issue in Meena Kumari @ Meena Kumari Rout
vs. State of Odisha and others decided in W.P.(C) No.23169 of
2023 vide judgment dated 18.10.2023 of a coordinate Bench of this
Court. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the Petitioner
contended that the Petitioner be granted liberty to approach the
Opposite Parties with a further direction to Opposite Parties to
reconsider the case of the Petitioner in terms of the judgment in
Meena Kumari (supra).
6. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand submitted that
he has no specific instruction in the matter. However, in the event,
the Petitioner wants his case to be reconsidered in the light of
judgment referred to by the learned counsel for the Petitioner, he
will have no objection to the same in the event the Opposite Parties
are directed to consider the applicability of such judgment to the
fact of the Petitioner's case before passing any final order in the
matter.
7. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the
respective parties, on a careful examination of the background facts,
further on consideration of the judgment in Meena Kumari (supra),
this Court is of the view that the matter can very well be disposed of
at the stage of admission. Accordingly, the present writ petition is
disposed of by granting liberty to the Petitioner to approach the
Opposite Party No.2 by filing a detailed representation taking
therein all the grounds along with supporting documents and a copy
of the judgment dated 18.10.2023 passed in Meena Kumari (supra)
within a period of ten days from today. In such eventuality, the
Opposite Party No.4 shall do well to consider and dispose of the
representation of the Petitioner within four weeks' in the light of the
judgment in Meena Kumari (supra) by passing a speaking and
reasoned order. The final decision so taken be communicated to the
Petitioner within seven days thereafter.
8. With the aforesaid observation, the writ application stands
disposed of.
Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.
( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra )
Judge
Sisir
Designation: PERSONAL ASSISTANCE
