IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.18953 of 2026 Simadri Konhar ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Lalatendu Samal -versus- State Of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties Mr. S.K. Jee, AGA CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 25.06.2026 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned counsel 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: “It is therefore prayed that your lordships' would be graciously pleased to admit the writ petition and after hearing the counsels from both the sides issue Writ / Writs in the nature of Mandamus by way of quashing the impugned transfer order at Annexure-8 to the writ petition issued by the Opp.party No.2 so far it relates to the petitioner only and the Opp.parties be directed to allow the petitioner to continue at Phulbank as ABEO with all service and financial benefits till completion of his normal tenure at Phulbani. Page 1 of 3. AND/OR pass such other order/ orders deemed fit and proper;”

4. It is stated by learned counsel for the Petitioner that being aggrieved by the order of transfer dated 12.06.2026 under Annexure-8 issued by the Director of Elementary Education, Odisha, Bhubaneswar, whereby the Petitioner has been transferred from Phulbani to Kotagarh in the district of Kandhamal the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present application. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that after working for eight years in Raikia in the district of Kandhamal the Petitioner was transferred last year to his present place of posting. However, before completion of one year at his present place of posting, the Petitioner has been transferred once again. He further contended that ventilating his grievance he has already filed a representation before the Opposite Party No.2 on 16.06.2026 at Annexure-9 to the writ petition, however, no decision has been taken on such representation of the Petitioner. 5. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that he has no specific instruction in the matter, however, in the event the representation of the Petitioner is pending and no final decision has been taken thereon by the Opposite Party No.2, he will have no objection in the event this Court directs the Opposite Party No.2 to consider and dispose of the representation of the Petitioner in accordance with law within a stipulated period of time.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties, on a careful analysis of their Page 2 of 3. submission and on a close scrutiny of the document annexed to the writ petition, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ petition at the stage of admission by directing the Opposite Party No.2 to consider and dispose of the representation of the Petitioner dated 16.06.2026 at Annexure-9 within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of a certified copy of today’s order. The Opposite Party No.2 shall do well to dispose of the representation of the Petitioner by passing a speaking and reasoned order. The final decision so taken be communicated to the Petitioner within a week thereafter. It is further directed that till disposal of the representation of the Petitioner, if the same is still pending, the impugned transfer order dated 12.06.2026 at Annexure-8, so far as the Petitioner is concerned, shall not be given effect to if the Petitioner has not been relieved in the meantime. 7. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ application stands disposed of. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. ( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra ) Judge S.K. Rout Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SANTANU KUMAR ROUT Page 3 of 3. Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 25-Jun-2026 18:01:58

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.18953 of 2026 Simadri Konhar ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Lalatendu Samal -versus- State Of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties Mr. S.K. Jee, AGA CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 25.06.2026 Order No. 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned counsel 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: “It is therefore prayed that your lordships' would be graciously pleased to admit the writ petition and after hearing the counsels from both the sides issue Writ / Writs in the nature of Mandamus by way of quashing the impugned transfer order at Annexure-8 to the writ petition issued by the Opp.party No.2 so far it relates to the petitioner only and the Opp.parties be directed to allow the petitioner to continue at Phulbank as ABEO with all service and financial benefits till completion of his normal tenure at Phulbani. Page 1 of 3. AND/OR pass such other order/ orders deemed fit and proper;”

4. It is stated by learned counsel for the Petitioner that being aggrieved by the order of transfer dated 12.06.2026 under Annexure-8 issued by the Director of Elementary Education, Odisha, Bhubaneswar, whereby the Petitioner has been transferred from Phulbani to Kotagarh in the district of Kandhamal the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present application. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that after working for eight years in Raikia in the district of Kandhamal the Petitioner was transferred last year to his present place of posting. However, before completion of one year at his present place of posting, the Petitioner has been transferred once again. He further contended that ventilating his grievance he has already filed a representation before the Opposite Party No.2 on 16.06.2026 at Annexure-9 to the writ petition, however, no decision has been taken on such representation of the Petitioner. 5. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that he has no specific instruction in the matter, however, in the event the representation of the Petitioner is pending and no final decision has been taken thereon by the Opposite Party No.2, he will have no objection in the event this Court directs the Opposite Party No.2 to consider and dispose of the representation of the Petitioner in accordance with law within a stipulated period of time.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties, on a careful analysis of their Page 2 of 3. submission and on a close scrutiny of the document annexed to the writ petition, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ petition at the stage of admission by directing the Opposite Party No.2 to consider and dispose of the representation of the Petitioner dated 16.06.2026 at Annexure-9 within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of a certified copy of today’s order. The Opposite Party No.2 shall do well to dispose of the representation of the Petitioner by passing a speaking and reasoned order. The final decision so taken be communicated to the Petitioner within a week thereafter. It is further directed that till disposal of the representation of the Petitioner, if the same is still pending, the impugned transfer order dated 12.06.2026 at Annexure-8, so far as the Petitioner is concerned, shall not be given effect to if the Petitioner has not been relieved in the meantime. 7. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ application stands disposed of. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. ( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra ) Judge S.K. Rout Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SANTANU KUMAR ROUT Page 3 of 3. Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 25-Jun-2026 18:01:58