IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.11642 of 2026 (In the matter of an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India)

Chandra Sekhar Sahu ....... Petitioner -Versus-

State of Odisha and others ....... Opposite Parties W.P.(C) No.11644 of 2026 Aswini Mohapatro ....... Petitioner -Versus-

State of Odisha and others ....... Opposite Parties W.P.(C) No.11646 of 2026 Khiramani Sabar ....... Petitioner -Versus-

State of Odisha and others ....... Opposite Parties W.P.(C) No.11648 of 2026 Ganapati Sahu ....... Petitioner -Versus-

State of Odisha and others ....... Opposite Parties W.P.(C) No.11653 of 2026 Sushree Madhusmita Behera ....... Petitioner -Versus-

State of Odisha and others ....... Opposite Parties Advocate for the parties For Petitioner : Mrs. S. Jena, Sr. Adv.

assisted by Ms. P. Jena, Advocate (in all the writ petitions)

For Opposite Parties : Mr. M.K. Dash, ASC ------------------------ ----

CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date of Hearing & Judgment: 04.05.2026 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

S.K. Mishra, J

1. The writ petitions, which are on board, having identical issues and on consent of learned Counsel for the parties, are taken up together and disposed of vide this common judgment. For brevity, W.P.(C) No.11642 of 2026 is taken up as lead case.

2. Heard Mrs. Jena, learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner so also Mr. Dash, learned ASC, who accepts notice on behalf of Opposite Party No.1 and admits to have received copy of the writ petition.

3. The Petitioner, who claims himself to be a student of Dr. B.D. Jatti College of Education, Vijaypura in the State of Karnataka (Opposite Party No.4), has preferred the present writ petition with the following prayers:

“ PRAYER In the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner respectfully prays that the Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit this writ petition, issue notice to the 0pp. Parties specifically to O.P. no. 2 to show cause as to why steps have not been taken on his representations to allow him to appear in the examination by changing the examination centre under annexure - 2 and 4 and if the Opp. Parties fail to show cause or shown insufficient cause, the Hon’ble Court upon hearing the parties may further be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ by directing the opposite parties to take immediate steps on the representations under annexure-2 and 4 within a stipulated period And may be further pleased to pass such other order/orders, direction/directions as may be deemed expedient in the interest of justice;

And for this act of kindness as the petitioner is duty bound shall ever pray.”

(Emphasis supplied)

4. Mr. Dash, learned ASC raises the issue regarding maintainability of the writ petition on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction.

5. Mrs. Jena, learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner, relying on the judgment of the High Court of Gujarat reported in 2022 SCC OnLine Guj 2569 (Bhavendra Hasmukhlal Patadia Vs. Union of India submits, the Petitioner is a resident of village-Raghunath Nagar in the district of Rayagada, which comes under the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. In view of the principle of forum conveniens and provisions enshrined under Article 226 (2) of the Constitution of India, the writ petition would be maintainable before this Court. Hence, it would be apt to reproduce below the Article 226(2) of the Constitution of India for ready reference.

“226. Power of High Courts to issue certain Writs.(1)

xxx xxx xxx xxxx (2) The power conferred by clause (1) to issue directions, orders or writs to any Government, authority or person may also be exercised by any High Court exercising jurisdiction in relation to the territories within which the cause of action, wholly or in part, arises for the exercise of such power, notwithstanding that th