IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.14580 of 2026 Bhagyalata Nayak ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Swagat Kumar Sahu -versus- 1) state of odisha ..... Opposite Parties 2) director, elementary education, Represented by Adv. – bhubaneswar Mr. D.K. Sahoo, AGA 3) state project director, opepa, bhubaneswar 4) collector cum ceo, ganjam 5) district project coordinator, ssa, ganjam 6) district education officer, berhampur CORAM: MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 22.06.2026 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 learned Additional Govt. Advocate for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ application as well as the documents annexed thereto. 3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the following prayer: “Under the above circumstances, it is therefore, humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be graciously pleased to; i. Admit the writ application ii. Call for records Page 1 of 3.

iii. issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ , direction or order by directing the opp. Parties to engage the petitioner as Gana Sikshyak in view of the Government resolution No.3368 dated 16.02.2008 under annexure-6 and the order dated 03.07.2008 under annexure-8 , as he is otherwise entitled for the same and the similarly situated persons like the petitioner has already been engaged as the Gana Sikshyak in response to the orders of this Hon'ble Court in the case Sulochana Nayak versus State of Orissa (WPC No.- 3317 of 2009, disposed of an 07.04.2009). iv. And / or pass any other appropriate order/(s), direction/ direction(s) as this Hon'ble Court deems fit proper for the ends of justice. And for this act of kindness, the petitioner shall as in duty bound ever pray.” 4. In course of hearing of the writ application, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner ventilating his grievance has submitted representation dated 17.11.2025 before the Collector-cum-CEO, Ganjam, Jagatsighpur, Opposite Party No.4 under Annexure-10. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the said representation is pending as of now. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that a direction be issued to the Opposite Party No.4 to consider the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-10 within a stipulated period of time.

5. Learned Additional Govt. Advocate submits that he has no objection if the representation of the Petitioner is considered by the Opposite Party No.4, which is stated to be pending, in accordance with law within a stipulated period of time. Page 2 of 3. 6. Considering the limited nature of grievance of the Petitioner, the writ application is disposed of at the stage of admission with a direction to the Opposite Party No.4 to consider the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-10 within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. The Opposite Party No.4 shall do well to dispose of the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-10 by passing a speaking and reasoned order and also taking into consideration the ratio laid down in the case of Sulochana Nayak versus State of Orissa bearing WPC No.- 3317 of 2009, disposed of on 07.04.2009. The decision so taken by the Opposite Party No.4 be also communicated to the Petitioner within ten days thereafter. 7. With the aforesaid observation/ direction, the writ application stands disposed of. 8. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Sisir Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SISIR KUMAR SETHI Designation: PERSONAL ASSISTANT Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Date: 23-Jun-2026 18:03:37 Page 3 of 3.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.14580 of 2026 Bhagyalata Nayak ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Swagat Kumar Sahu -versus- 1) state of odisha ..... Opposite Parties 2) director, elementary education, Represented by Adv. – bhubaneswar Mr. D.K. Sahoo, AGA 3) state project director, opepa, bhubaneswar 4) collector cum ceo, ganjam 5) district project coordinator, ssa, ganjam 6) district education officer, berhampur CORAM: MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 22.06.2026 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 learned Additional Govt. Advocate for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ application as well as the documents annexed thereto. 3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the following prayer: “Under the above circumstances, it is therefore, humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be graciously pleased to; i. Admit the writ application ii. Call for records Page 1 of 3.

iii. issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ , direction or order by directing the opp. Parties to engage the petitioner as Gana Sikshyak in view of the Government resolution No.3368 dated 16.02.2008 under annexure-6 and the order dated 03.07.2008 under annexure-8 , as he is otherwise entitled for the same and the similarly situated persons like the petitioner has already been engaged as the Gana Sikshyak in response to the orders of this Hon'ble Court in the case Sulochana Nayak versus State of Orissa (WPC No.- 3317 of 2009, disposed of an 07.04.2009). iv. And / or pass any other appropriate order/(s), direction/ direction(s) as this Hon'ble Court deems fit proper for the ends of justice. And for this act of kindness, the petitioner shall as in duty bound ever pray.” 4. In course of hearing of the writ application, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner ventilating his grievance has submitted representation dated 17.11.2025 before the Collector-cum-CEO, Ganjam, Jagatsighpur, Opposite Party No.4 under Annexure-10. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the said representation is pending as of now. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that a direction be issued to the Opposite Party No.4 to consider the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-10 within a stipulated period of time.

5. Learned Additional Govt. Advocate submits that he has no objection if the representation of the Petitioner is considered by the Opposite Party No.4, which is stated to be pending, in accordance with law within a stipulated period of time. Page 2 of 3. 6. Considering the limited nature of grievance of the Petitioner, the writ application is disposed of at the stage of admission with a direction to the Opposite Party No.4 to consider the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-10 within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. The Opposite Party No.4 shall do well to dispose of the representation of the Petitioner under Annexure-10 by passing a speaking and reasoned order and also taking into consideration the ratio laid down in the case of Sulochana Nayak versus State of Orissa bearing WPC No.- 3317 of 2009, disposed of on 07.04.2009. The decision so taken by the Opposite Party No.4 be also communicated to the Petitioner within ten days thereafter. 7. With the aforesaid observation/ direction, the writ application stands disposed of. 8. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. ( A.K. Mohapatra ) Judge Sisir Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SISIR KUMAR SETHI Designation: PERSONAL ASSISTANT Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Date: 23-Jun-2026 18:03:37 Page 3 of 3.