[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Anil Kumar Sarangi vs State Of Odisha And Others ..... ... on 19 January, 2026
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.1278 of 2026
Anil Kumar Sarangi ..... Petitioner
Represented by Adv. -
Bibekananda Mahapatra
-versus-
State Of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties
Represented by Adv. -
Smt. S. Nayak, ASC
CORAM:
MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA
ORDER
19.01.2026
Order No.
01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual
/Physical Mode).
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as the learned
counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ petition as
well as the documents annexed thereto.
3. The present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner with
the following prayers:-
"It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be
pleased to:-
i) Admit the writ application ;
ii) Call for the records ;
iii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 0pp. Parties to
grant RACP
benefits to the petitioner's as per the Finance Department
Resolution dated 06.02.2013 read with the Judgment
pronounced in O.A No-1668/2017 disposed on 09.10.2018,
W.P.( C)-6698/2020 disposed on 13.03.2020,and SLP(C) no-
15573/2020 disposed on 04.01.2021.by computing the entire
period of service rendered during the pre-taken over period
w.e.f. receiving of grant.
iv) And further necessary declaration be made in declaring
that the stipulation made Govt. letter 14.07.2022 that the said
order will not be precedent to others Is bad in law.
v) And/or pass such other order/orders, direction/ directions
as this Hon'ble Court may think fit and proper for the ends of
Justice.
And for this act of kindness the petitioner as in duty
bound shall ever pray."
4. Learned counsel for both the parties agreed that the issue involved
in this writ petition is analogues to one involved in O.A. No. 1668 of
2017 (Ashok Kumar Mohapatra v. State of Orissa), which was
disposed of by the Odisha Administrative Tribunal vide judgment dated
09.10.2018 and confirmed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.6698 of 2020
and further confirmed by the apex Court in SLP(C) No.15573 of 2020.
5. Learned counsel for the State submitted that although he has no
instruction however, in the event, the Petitioner has approached the
Opposite Parties to cause redressal of his grievance in terms of the
judgment referred to hereinabove, he shall have no objection if this
Court directs the Opposite Parties to consider the Petitioner's case in
accordance with law and dispose of the same within a stipulated period
of time.
6. Having regard to the learned counsels appearing for the
respective parties, on a careful examination of the materials on
record, further taking into consideration, the nature of grievance
involved in the present writ application, this Court deems it proper
to dispose of the present writ application at the stage of admission
by directing the Opposite Parties to consider the case of the
Petitioner, if the same has not been considered and disposed of in
the meantime, strictly in accordance with law and by keeping in
view the dictum in Ashok Kumar Mohapatra's case (supra) and,
dispose of the same by passing a speaking and reasoned order
within a period of eight weeks' from the date of communication of
a copy of today's order.
7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the Writ
Application stands disposed of.
(Aditya Kumar Mohapatra)
Judge
Sisir
Designation: Personal Assistant
