[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Pranab Kishore Pattnaik vs Sanjeev Kumar Mishra on 24 December, 2025
Author: S.K. Sahoo
Bench: S.K. Sahoo
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CONTC No.5879 of 2025
Pranab Kishore Pattnaik
and others .... Petitioners
Mr. Budhadev Routray,
Senior Advocate being assisted
by Mr. S. Routray, Advocate
-versus-
Sanjeev Kumar Mishra,
IAS, Principal Secretary,
Finance Department,
.... Contemnors/
Bhubaneswar and others
Opp. Parties
Mr. Aurovinda Mohanty,
Addl. Standing Counsel
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No. 24.12.2025
01. This matter is taken up through Hybrid
arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode).
This contempt petition has been filed by the
petitioners, Pranab Kishore Pattnaik and others for
non-compliance of the order dated 06.12.2022 passed
by this Court in W.P.(C) No.20581 of 2017 as well as
order dated 03.11.2023 passed in CONTC No.7943 of
2023.
Designation: Personal Assistant
Reason: Authentication
Location: HIGH COURT OF
ORISSA, CUTTACK
It appears that the petitioners approached this
Date: 24-Dec-2025 21:00:24
Court in W.P.(C) No.20581 of 2017 and the same was
disposed of vide order dated 06.12.2022 and in the
operative portion of the order, it has been held as
follows:
"xxx xxx xxx
Learned counsel for the petitioners
submitted that similar matters were filed
before this Court in W.P.(C) No.20401 of
2017 and W.P.(C) No.20246 of 2017 and
both the matters were analogously heard
and disposed of by a common judgment
dated 29.09.2022 and this case is squarely
covered by the ratio laid down in the said
judgment.
A copy of the judgment was handed over to
the learned Additional Government
Advocate for the State and on perusal of the
same, he does not dispute such aspect. The
learned counsel for the opp. party no.2 also
concurs with the submission of the learned
counsel for the petitioners.
Taking into account the observation made
by this Court in paragraphs-14, 15 and 16
of the judgment, it is ordered that the
matter needs to be revisited by the Finance
Department keeping in view the peculiar
facts and circumstances as narrated in the
writ petition. The writ petition is therefore,
disposed of with a direction to the
Secretary, Finance Department (opp. party
no.5) to consider the proposal of the
Administrative Department afresh in terms
of the observations made in the judgment
passed in the connected writ petitions
disposed of an 29.09.2022. Such exercise
shall be completed within a period of two
months from the date of communication of
this order or on production of certified copy
thereof by the petitioners".
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted
pursuant to the order dated 06.12.2022, the
petitioners submitted the copy of the order to the
contemnor/opp. party for implementation of the same
and on 17.12.2022, the order was also communicated
by the Registry of this Court, however, the order was
not implemented, for which, the petitioners filed a
contempt petition i.e. CONTC No.7943 of 2023 and
the same was disposed of vide order dated
19.10.2023 and in the operative portion, it has been
held as follows:
"Considering the facts and circumstances of
the case and upon hearing learned counsel
for the parties, this Contempt Petition is
disposed of by granting one month further
time to the opp. party-contemnor to comply
the order passed on 06.12.2022. However, if
the order is not complied with within the
extended time, it will be held as deliberate
violation of this Court's order".
Learned counsel further submitted that in spite
of the time stipulated by this Court not only while
disposing of the writ petition but also the contempt
petition, the order has not been complied with.
Mr. Routray, learned Senior Advocate submitted
that the order dated 06.12.2022 passed in W.P.(C)
No.20581 of 2017 clearly indicated that similar
matters were before this Court in W.P.(C) No.20401 of
2017 and W.P.(C) No.20426 of 2017 and the matters
were analogously heard and disposed of by a common
judgment dated 29.09.2022 and even though, the
copy of the judgment was handed over to the learned
Additional Govt. Advocate for the State at that point of
time, he did not dispute such aspect so also the
learned counsel for opp. party no.2 also concurred
with the submission of the learned counsel for the
petitioners. He further submits that in the said two
writ petitions, since orders were not complied with,
the CONTC No.126 of 2024 and CONTC No.127 of
2024 were filed and both were listed last time on
04.12.2025, wherein the contemnor appeared and he
assured this Court that in view of the clarification
issued by the NESTS that they would bear the
financial cost including salary payments and also
clarified that it has no objection to the steps to be
taken by OMTES for the regularization of the
petitioners, the process of regularization shall be
worked out and some time was sought for and
accordingly, this Court granted four weeks' time to the
State to fully implement the order of this Court and
directed the matters to be listed on 15.01.2026.
Learned counsel for the State seeks some time
to obtain instruction regarding the implementation of
the order particularly in view of the order dated
04.12.2025 passed in CONTC No.126 of 2024 and
CONTC No.127 of 2024.
List this matter on 16.01.2026.
Learned counsel for the State so also learned
counsel for the petitioners shall apprise this Court
about the developments made in the meantime.
( S.K. Sahoo)
Judge
24th December 2025
Sipun
