Orissa High Court
Roshan Patnaik vs Shalini Mohanty .... Opp. Party on 12 March, 2026
Author: Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo
Bench: Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.20257 of 2025
Roshan Patnaik .... Petitioner
Mr. Roshan Patnaik in person
-versus-
Shalini Mohanty .... Opp. Party
Ms. Suchismita Das, Advocate
CORAM:
JUSTICE MRUGANKA SEKHAR SAHOO
ORDER
12.03.2026 (Hybrid Mode) Order No.
08. 1. The case being in the list and marked to be taken up at 02.00 PM due to continuation of hearing other matters which were passed-over and was taken up at 03.15 PM.
2. Ms. Das, learned counsel for the opp. party being present in the Virtual Court of the High Court of Orissa, Khurda at Bhubaneswar addresses the arguments.
The petitioner present in person as well as Ms. Das, learned counsel for the Opp. Party are heard.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the opp. party referring to the orders dated 29.01.2026, 05.02.2026 and order dated 26.02.2026 that the opp. party has to file an affidavit which she has not been able to do as she is suffering from conjunctivitis.
Page 1 of 54. At this stage, filing of an affidavit by the opp. party in response to the submissions and affidavits filed by the petitioner is not that important as the central issue is regarding admission of the child of the petitioner and Opp. Party, aged about 5 years to school.
5. It is submitted by the petitioner appearing in person who is the father of the child that he fully agrees and supports the statement of the mother-Opp. Party that the child will be admitted to the KIIT International School as was recorded earlier by this Court at paragraph 17 of the order dated 26.02.2026.
It is submitted by the petitioner appearing in person that he is not being involved in the process of admission of child to school and there is no reason why he should not be involved along with the mother who is taking initiative for school admission.
6. It is submitted that the petitioner-father has visitation rights in respect of the child, however, he has not been able to take the child out to play and he is mostly confined to a place within the premises of the residence of the mother of the child.
In response, learned counsel for the opp. party- mother submits that the child having ADHD and requires constant monitoring and therefore, may not be taken out to play in open.
7. In considered view of this Court, the concern expressed by the mother as stated by the learned Page 2 of 5 counsel for the opp. party is appropriate. However, it cannot be assumed that the father will not take proper care of the child. It shall be open for the opp. party mother to remain present if the child plays in the open, particularly in any place where there is ample space for the child and other adequate playing equipment. The child should be taken to an open space for which the petitioner and the opp. party are directed to agree. It would be at their option for both of them to remain present, however, at least, one of them should remain present to take care of the child constantly along with any other person they would like to be present to attend the child apart from them.
8. At this stage, on being asked to the learned counsel for the opp. party submits that she does not have and will obtain instruction regarding the admission of the child.
Which is rather unusual as after the opp. party herself suggested for admitting the child to the KIIT International School the Court has proceeded on that basis. The matter was passed over observing that the learned counsel for the petitioner shall obtain instruction from her as to when she can ensure admission of the child in the KIIT International School as has been repeatedly indicated by her before this Court recorded in earlier order. It was further observed that the child being school going age cannot be deprived of education, more so, when the father is Page 3 of 5 before this Court raising the issue of child getting education in a school suitable for him. It was observed that if further impasse continuous regarding admission of the child to school, the District Child Welfare Committee shall be roped in.
9. After sometime the matter is called again and taken up, upon instruction received, the learned counsel for the Opp. Party submits that the admission of the child to the KIIT International School shall be made at the earliest.
10. It is directed that the opp. party as she has stated for getting the child admitted to KIIT International School, Bhubaneswar shall take all the steps for getting the child admitted in KIIT International School. The petitioner-husband-father is also directed to participate cooperate in getting the child admitted.
In each stage of admission process of the child, both the petitioner-father as well as the opp. party- mother shall be involved. None of the parties shall raise any plea/pretext regarding unavailability, difficulty as far as admission of the child to the school is concerned.
11. On approaching the KIIT International School, Bhubaneswar, the school authority shall also extend all necessary assistance for admitting the child to the school.
12. Admission process shall be completed by 20.03.2026.
Page 4 of 513. The matter shall be listed on 07.04.2026 marked at 02.00 PM.
(Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo) Judge Rajesh Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: RAJESH KUMAR BADHEI Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 19-Mar-2026 19:07:33 Page 5 of 5