Rabindra Kumar Pradhan v. State of Odisha & Ors.
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Judgment
Petitioner Mr. Maheswar Mohanty, Advocate …. -versus- State of Odisha and Others …. Opp. Parties Mr. J. Khandaraytray, ASC CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH Order No.
#2. ORDER 14.07.2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the petition papers, this Court is of the considered view that the present Writ Petition is not maintainable inasmuch as the grievance raised by the Petitioner can appropriately be agitated before the competent statutory authority/forum. It is well settled that the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India ordinarily ought not to be invoked when an efficacious alternative remedy is available, subject to well-recognised exceptions, none of which are attracted in the facts of the present case.
#3. In the above circumstances, this Court declines to entertain the Writ Petition. However, liberty is reserved to the Petitioner to approach the appropriate authority/forum for redressal of the grievance, if so advised, in accordance with law.
#4. Needless to observe that if such proceedings are initiated, the competent authority/forum shall consider the same on its own merits and in accordance with law, without being influenced by any observation made in this order.
#5. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. Judge (Chittaranjan Dash) AKPradhan
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.
Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.