[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
State Of Odisha And Another (In All) vs Tanmaya Kumar Sahoo & Ors. (In W.A. No. ... on 23 February, 2026
Author: Chittaranjan Dash
Bench: Chittaranjan Dash
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.A. Nos. 487 of 2024, W.A. No.818 of 2021, W.A. No.557
of 2022, WA No.1137 of 2022, W.a. No.1214 of 2022, W.A.
No.1600 of 2022, W.A. No.1674 of 2022, W.A. No.89 of
2023, W.A. No.1039 of 2023, W.A. No.1154 of 2023 & W.A.
No.488 of 2024
State of Odisha and another (In all) .... Appellants
Mr. S. B. Mohanty, AGA
-versus-
Tanmaya Kumar Sahoo & Ors. (In W.A. No. 487 of 2024)
Saroj Kumar Tripathy (In W.A. No. 818 of 2021)
Satyabrata Nayak & Ors. (In W.A. No. 557 of 2022)
Sangram Keshari Guin and Ors. (In W.A. No. 1137 of 2022)
Jyoti Ranjan Satapathy (In W.A. No. 1214 of 2022)
Deepak Kumar Sahoo (In W.A. No. 1600 of 2022)
Jayanta Kumar Lenka and Ors. (In W.A. No. 1674 of 2022)
Tapas Ranjan Mahapatra and Ors. (In W.A. No. 89 of 2023)
Arati Kumar Dash (In W.A. No. 1039 of 2023)
Jagannath Behera and Anr. (In W.A. No. 1154 of 2023)
Susri Sangita Sahoo (In W.A. No. 488 of 2024)
Respondents
Mr. Ramakanta Sahoo, Advocate
CORAM:
JUSTICE KRISHNA SHRIPAD DIXIT
JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH
ORDER
Order No. 23.02.2026
W.A. No.487/2024 & I.A. Nos.2806 of 2022, 2966 of 2022,
3751 of 2022, 3915 of 2022, 208 of 2023, 2995 of 2023 &
1224 of 2024
04. In these Appeals, the State and its functionaries calling in
question the judgment dated 15.09.2021 entered by learned
Single Judge's in WPC (OAC) Nos. 1102, 3219, 1613 of 2017,
whereby relief has been accorded to the writ petitioners as
under:
"In view of the factual and legal analysis, as discussed
above, this Court, is of the considered view that the draft
reject list, so far as present petitioners are concerned, cannot
sustain, in the eye of law and the same is liable to be
quashed and is hereby quashed. The opposite parties are
directed to take into consideration the applications filed by
the petitioners in the above mentioned writ petitions, allow
them to participate in the process of selection, consider their
case for engagement as Contract Teacher (Hindi) by re-
drawing the select list and extend them all the benefits in
accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible,
preferably within a period of three months from the date of
communication of this judgment."
We are told at Bar that this judgment has been duplicated in rest
of the matters that happen to be a bunch of cases for
consideration at our hand.
2. All these Appeals by the State are filed after brooking
varying periods of delay. An application supported by affidavit
in individual cases has moved seeking condonation of delay.
Mr. Mohanty, learned AGA submits that in terms of our order,
the remittance of the delay cost has been made to the
Respondent-employees individually. This has not been much
disputed before us by the other side. Therefore, application
having been favoured, delay stands condoned in terms of the
earlier orders.
3. The jugular vein of all these Appeals is the effect of
extension of cut-off date for applying for the post in question by
those who had not applied under the earlier Recruitment
Notification. This happened eventually because of Odisha
Administrative Tribunal's order dated 17.12.2025 passed in OA
No.3589 of 2014 wherein a direction was given for the
extension of the upper age limit from 32 to 42 years of age. The
question raised in all these Appeals need not detain us for long,
the same being no longer res integra vide the judgment of a Co-
Ordinate Bench in Writ Appeal No.102 of 2016 between
Biswaranjan Biswal vs. State of Orissa disposed off on
29.11.2022. We have the advantage of our own judgment in
Writ Appeal No.1306 of 2025 between State of Odisha and
Others vs. Nirupama Jena decided on 05.02.2026 wherein
Paragraph 4 reads as under:
"4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having
perused the Appeal papers, we decline indulgence in the matter,
inasmuch as the question raised is no longer res integra. The
same has been stoutly answered by the Co-ordinate Bench in
Biswajranjan supra, which related to the very same recruitment
process and the very same corrigendum. At Paragraph-16, the
Bench has observed as under:
"16. Even the plea that the corrigendum relates back to
the original advertisement overlooks the fact that as
far as the present Appellants are concerned, they became
qualified to apply only because of the relaxation of the
upper age limit pursuant to the orders of this Court as
explained hereinbefore. In other words, it is only by
virtue of corrigendum that the Appellants came to apply
for the post. If the corrigendum were to relate back to the
original date, they would not even be qualified to apply.
Therefore, as far as the three Appellants are concerned, it
cannot be said that the relevant date for determining
whether the Appellants possess the requisite qualification
has to be the original date of 30th September 2014. It has
to be the revised date in terms of the corrigendum."
To put it succinctly all those candidates who have acquired
the requisite qualification on or before the issuance of second
Notification/Corrigendum would be entitled to stake their
claim for selection & appointment even if such acquisition is
made beyond the cut-off date mentioned in the first
Recruitment Notification. An otherwise interpretation would
defeat the very purpose of issuing the second
Notification/Corrigendum, for the mitigation of the job
aspirants in public employment.
In view of the above, these Appeals being unworthy of
merits are liable to be dismissed, and accordingly they are,
cost in the circumstances, having been made easy.
The impugned orders of the learned Single Judge shall
be given effect to within an outer limit of three months,
without driving the Respondents to the coercive action in
terms of the Contempt of the Courts Act, 1971 or the like.
Web coy of this order to be acted upon by all concerned.
(Krishna Shripad Dixit)
Judge
(Chittaranjan Dash)
Judge
AKPradhan
Signed by: ANANTA KUMAR PRADHAN
Designation: Senior Stenographer
Reason: Authentication
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
Date: 24-Feb-2026 18:38:23
