Geetanjali Sahoo vs ) State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Parties
2026 Latest Caselaw 973 Ori

Orissa High Court

Geetanjali Sahoo vs ) State Of Odisha ..... Opposite Parties on 4 February, 2026

Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra

Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                             WP(C) No.3739 of 2026
            Geetanjali Sahoo              .....      Petitioner
                                                              Represented by Adv. -
                                                              Sourav Das

                                           -versus-
            1) State Of Odisha                        .....       Opposite Parties
            2) Odisha School Education                        Represented by Adv. -
            Programme Authority, Bhubaneswar,                 Mr. S.Behera, A.G.A.
            Khurda,

                                  CORAM:
                    THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
                                MOHAPATRA

                                                ORDER

Order No.                                       04.02.2026
    01.        1.    This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement
               (Virtual /Physical Mode).

2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ application as well as the prayer made therein.

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

"It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be graciously pleased to admit the present writ application/ petition, issue notice to the Opposite Parties and after hearing both the parties be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate Writ/ Writs & thereafter, select & appoint the Petitioner as a Junior Teacher (Schematic);

And may pass any other appropriate Writ/Writs and order/orders which this Hon'ble Court may deem

fit, just and proper."

4. It is stated by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner who has applied for appointment to the post of Junior Teacher (Schematic) pursuant to an advertisement dated 10.09.2023 under Annexure-2, his application has not been duly considered by the Opposite Parties. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that the Petitioner is having Diploma in Elementary Education (D.El.Ed.) with an experience of eighteen months. Since the requirement under the advertisement at Annexure-2 is that of two years' experience, the case of the Petitioner has not been considered. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at this juncture contended that the issue involved in the present case was directly and substantially in issue before a Coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No.21675 of 2024 and a batch of other similar writ applications (Santosh Kumar Swain vs. State of Odisha & Ors.) which were disposed of vide judgment dated 17.12.2025. As per the judgment dated 17.12.2025, the learned Coordinate Bench has been pleased to quash the condition that "candidates applied with qualification of 18 months D.El.Ed course from 2017-2019 through ODL from NIOS will not be entertained" has been specifically quashed by issuing a writ afresh very well. Further, by issuing a writ of mandamus, a direction has been given to the State to bestow the appointment upon the Petitioner to the respective post of Junior Teacher (Schematic). Referring to the aforesaid judgment, learned counsel for the Petitioner at this

juncture emphatically argued that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the ratio laid down by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in its judgment dated 17.12.2025 in the matter of Santosh Kumar Swain (supra). He further submitted that although the Petitioner has submitted a representation at Annexure-6 to the writ application, however such representation has not been considered yet.

5. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that he has no specific instruction in the matter. He further submitted that there is no evidence on record, that the Petitioner has approached the State learned Coordinator. However, he is not the Competent Authority and no such representation has been filed by the Petitioner before the present Opposite Parties. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the State further contended that in the event this Court directs the Petitioner to approach the concerned Opposite Parties to consider the case of the Petitioner in terms of the judgment in Santosh Kumar Swain's case (supra) within a stipulated period of time, he will have no objection to the same.

6. Having regard to the submission made by the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties, on a careful examination of the background facts, further taking note of the limited nature of the grievance involved in the present writ application and keeping in view the judgment dated 17.12.2025 referred in Santosh Kumar Swain's case (supra) referred to by the Coordinate Bench, this Court deems it proper to dispose of

the present writ petition by granting liberty to the Petitioner to approach the Opposite Parties by filing a detailed representation taking therein all the grounds along with a copy of judgment dated 17.12.2025 within a period of ten days from today. In such eventuality, the Opposite Parties shall do well to consider such representation of the petitioner strictly in accordance with law and in terms of the ratio laid down in judgment dated 17.12.2025 in Santosh Kumar Swain's case (supra) and dispose of the representation by passing a speaking and reasoned order within a period of six weeks from the date the Petitioner approaches the Opposite Parties along with a copy of today's order. The final decision so taken be communicated to the Petitioner within ten days thereafter.

7. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ application stands disposed of.

8. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.

( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge

Rubi