[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Shashibhushan Mahato vs State Of Odisha And Others. ..... ... on 23 March, 2026
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.8627 of 2026
Shashibhushan Mahato ..... Petitioner
Represented by Adv. -
Mr. Tushar Kanta Nayak
-versus-
State of Odisha and others. ..... Opposite Parties
Represented by Adv. -
Smt. Sasmita Nayak, ASC
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA
ORDER
23.03.2026
Order No.
01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned
Additional Standing Counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused
the writ petition as well as the documents annexed thereto.
3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ petition with the
following prayers:-
"It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court
may graciously be pleased to admit the writ
application, call for the records, and after hearing
the parties issue writ in the nature of Mandamus or
any other appropriate Writ(s) /Direction(s) directing
the Opp. Parties to grant 3rd RACP /MACP benefits
to the petitioner as per the Finance Department
resolution dtd. 06.02.2013 read with the judgment of
the learned Odisha Administrative Tribunal,
Bhubaneswar passed in O.A. No.1668 of 2017 and
confirmed by this Hon'ble Court in W.P.(C) No.6698
of2020 and the Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP(c)
No.15573 of 2020 as well as letter of the Director of
Secondary Education dtd. 14.07.2022 by computing
the entire period of service rendered during the pre-
taken over period w.e.f. receiving of grant.
And / or pass such other order / orders,
direction /directions as deems fit and proper in the
interest of justice."
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at the outset, contended that
the Petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for a direction
to the Opposite Parties to grant RACP/MACP benefits to the
Petitioner in terms of the Finance Department resolution dated
06.02.2013 and by following the decision of the State Administrative
Tribunal in O.A. No.1668 of 2017 by the learned O.A.T. which was
confirmed by Division Bench of this Court in State of Odisha v.
Ashok Kumar Mohapatra (W.P.(C) No.6698 of 2020 vide order
dated 13.03.2020) and which was eventually upheld by the Hon'ble
Apex Court in SLP(C) No.15573 of 2020. Learned counsel for the
Petitioner, at this juncture, contended that in view of the settled
principle of law, the Petitioner is entitled to get the RACP/MACP
benefits. However, he has not been extended with such benefits. He
further contended that the case of the Petitioner is squarely covered
by the ratio laid down in Ashok Kumar Mohapatra's case (supra).
5. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, contended
that the Petitioner has not approached the Competent Authority, i.e.
Opposite Party No.3, District Education Officer, Keonjhar, for
redressal of his grievance. In such view of the matter, learned counsel
for the State contended that the Petitioner should approach the
Opposite party No.3 for redressal of his grievance and any direction
by this Court to the Opposite Party No.3 to consider the case of the
Petitioner in accordance with law would not be objected to by the
counsel for the State.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel
appearing for the respective parties, on a careful examination of the
background facts, further taking note of the fact that the issue
involved in the present writ application has already been adjudicated
and has attained finality in Ashok Kumar Mohapatra's case (supra),
this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ application at the
stage of admission by granting liberty to the Petitioner to approach
the Opposite Party No.3 by filing a fresh representation within three
weeks from today taking therein all the grounds along with all
supporting documents. In such eventuality, the Opposite Party No.3
shall do well to consider the representation of the Petitioner in
accordance with law and taking note of the ratio laid down 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 filing of such representation. 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.
(Aditya Kumar Mohapatra )
Judge
Debasis
