IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.702 of 2026 Chandrika Naik ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Chitta Ranjan Pattnaik -versus-

State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv. – Mr. A.Mohanty, A.S.C.

CORAM:

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

ORDER

15.01.2026 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 learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing 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:-

“Under such circumstance it is therefore prayed that , your Lordship's would be graciously pleased to admit this writ petition, call for records and after hearing the parties may be pleased to issue a writ/s/ order/s/ direction /s in the nature of mandamus directing the authority to give her appointment under the Rehabilitation Assistance Rule against the post of her father who died on harness dt.23/08/2022 forthwith, preferably within a stipulated period as this Hon'ble court deems fit and proper.

And further may pass any other Order/s, Direction/s, as this Hon'ble court deems fit and proper to extent relief to the petitioner.”

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that the Petitioner is the daughter and legal heir of one Bhubaneswar Naik, a former Govt. employee, who died in harness while working as Junior Clerk under D.E.O., Keonjhar and died on 23.08.2022. After the death of the former Govt. employee, the Petitioner being a legal heir filed an application for an appointment under the Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme on 16.05.2025 at Annexure-5 to the writ application. Since the application of the Petitioner for appointment on rehabilitation ground is pending, the Petitioner being aggrieved by such pendency and inaction of the Opposite Parties has approached this Court for a direction to the Opposite Party No.3 to consider the case of the Petitioner strictly in accordance with law.

5. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that in the event the Petitioner has approached the Opposite Party No.3 by filing an application under the Rehabilitation Assistance Scheme and the same is still pending, he will have no objection in the event this Court directs the Opposite Party No.3 to consider such application strictly in accordance with law, within a stipulated period of time.

6. Having heard the learned counsels appearing for the respective parties, on a careful examination of the background facts as well as the materials on record, further taking note of the grievance of the Petitioner that the application of the Petitioner for appointment on rehabilitation ground pending since 16.05.2025, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the present writ application by directing the Opposite Party No.3 to consider and dispose of the application of the Petitioner dated 16.05.2025 at Annexure-5 and the same is still pending within a period of eight weeks from the date of a communication of a copy of today’s order. It is needless to mention here that the application of the Petitioner shall be considered strictly in accordance with law and in terms of the law laid down by this Court as well as the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 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 Rubi Signature Not Verifi e d

Digitally Signed

Signed by: RUBI BEHERA

Reason: Authentication

Location: OHC

Date: 21-Jan-2026 10:46:41