SAIRAM PATRO SONALI PRUSTY, P.MOHANTY, J.MOHANTY, S.BEHERA, S.MOHANTY vs STATE OF ODISHA — WP(C)/8025/2026

Case under Constitution of India, 1950 Section 226,227. Disposed: --Disposed Off on 24th March 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: ODHC010181882026

Filing Number

WP(C)/10626/2026

Filing Date

10-Mar-2026

Registration No

WP(C)/8025/2026

Registration Date

13-Mar-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Biraja Prasanna Satapathy

Coram

Mr. Justice Biraja Prasanna Satapathy

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

SERVICE MATTERS ( 31 )

Sub-Category

REGULARISATION OF AD-HOC EMPLOYEES ETC. ( 2 )

Judicial Branch

Civil Section

Decision Date

24-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

--Disposed Off

Last updated 09-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India, 1950 Section 226,227

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SAIRAM PATRO SONALI PRUSTY, P.MOHANTY, J.MOHANTY, S.BEHERA, S.MOHANTY

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF ODISHA

  2. 2.CHIEF DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER, GANJAM

  3. 3.DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES, BHUBANESWAR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 24-Mar-2026

    Mr. Justice Biraja Prasanna SatapathyView PDF

    The High Court of Orissa disposed of the writ petition seeking regularization of petitioner Sriram Patro as a Pharmacist, granting him liberty to file a fresh representation before the opposing party within three weeks with supporting documents. The court directed the opposing party to take a lawful decision on the representation within three months of receipt and communicate the decision to the petitioner. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP(C)/8025/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Orissa disposed of the writ petition seeking regularization of petitioner Sriram Patro as a Pharmacist, granting him liberty to file a fresh representation before the opposing party within three weeks with supporting documents. The court directed the opposing party to take a lawful decision on the representation within three months of receipt and communicate the decision to the petitioner. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case