Orissa High Court Sri Jagannath Water Pumps vs State Of Odisha And Others ..... ... on 11 December, 2025 WP(C) No.33233 of 2025 Sri Jagannath Water Pumps ..... Petitioner Pvt. Ltd., Ganjam Represented by Adv. Khan Mahmoodul Hasan Niamati versus State Of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties Mr. C.M. Singh, ASC THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 11.12.2025 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 StateOpposite 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 may graciously be pleased to: i. Issue an appropriate Writ directing the Opposite Parties, particularly the Block Development Officer, Bangomunda, to release forthwith the due payment of Rs.12,59,494/ in favour of the petitioner along with interest as per Section 15 & 16 of the MSMED Act, 2006, calculated from Page 1 of 3. 16042025 till actual date of payment. ii. Direct the Opposite parties to pay the petitioner's statutory interest accrued on delayed payment under the MSMED Act within a stipulated period. iii. Pass such other order(s) as deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case." 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that the Petitioner is a MSME unit having a valid certificate which has been filed as Annexure2 to the writ petition. He further submitted that a work order was issued in favour of the Petitioner under Annexure3 to the writ petition. He further submitted that after successful completion of the work order the Petitioner submitted his final bill, however, the Opposite Parties have not paid the admitted dues of the Petitioner. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at this juncture, drawing attention of this Court to the representation of the Petitioner dated 15.09.2025 at Annexure7, contended that the Petitioner has approached the Opposite Party No.3 by filing a detailed representation, however, the same has not been considered. Being aggrieved by such inaction by the Opposite Party No.3, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition. 5. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that although he has no specific instruction in the matter, however, taking into consideration the fact that the Petitioner has already approached the Opposite Party No.3competent authority, in the event any such representation is still pending for consideration before the Opposite Page 2 of 3. Party No.3, he will have no objection if this Court directs the Opposite Party No.3 to consider and dispose of the grievance of the Petitioner in accordance with law and 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 submissions 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.3 to consider and dispose of the representation of the Petitioner at Annexure7 in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of a certified copy of today's order. The Opposite Party No.3 shall do well to disp