[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Mukesh Kumar Pradhan vs State Of Odisha & Others .... Opposite ... on 8 January, 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C ) No.33791 of 2025
Mukesh Kumar Pradhan .... Petitioner
Ms. P. Mohanty, Adv.
-versus-
State of Odisha & Others .... Opposite Parties
Mr. A. Tripathy, AGA
COROM:
JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
ORDER
08.01.2026
Order No I.A. NO.22507 of 2025
2. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode.
2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties
3. This is an application for modification of order
dt.10.12.2025.
4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the submission made, this Court is inclined to
recall order dt.10.12.2025 and a fresh order is passed in the
Writ Petition.
5. The I.A accordingly stands disposed of.
(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy)
Judge
1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.
// 2 //
3. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia
with the following prayer:
In the light of the above facts and
circumstances, it is humbly prayed that this
Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to
admit the present writ Petition and issue
Rule NISI, calling upon the Opposite Party to
show cause and if they fail to show cause
or show insufficient cause, issue
appropriate writ/order/directions for:
a. Regularization of the Petitioner to the
post of AEE from the date of initial
appointment with all service and financial
benefits on actual basis;
b. And pass any other order(s) as this
Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in
the interest of justice and Equity.
And for this act of kindness, the Petitioner
as in duty bound shall ever pray.
4. It is contended that claim of the Petitioner to get the
benefit as prayed for, is covered by an order passed by this
Court in its judgment dt.28.10.2025 in W.P.(C ) No.24653
of 2025 and batch under Annexure-13. It is accordingly
contended that similar benefit be extended, as prayed for.
5. Learned Addl. Standing Counsel on the other hand
contended that if the Petitioner's claim is covered by the
judgment available under Annexure-13, let he move an
appropriate application before Opp party No.1 for its
consideration.
6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the
parties and considering the submission made, this Court
while disposing the Writ Petition permits the Petitioner to
// 3 //
move Opp. Party No.1 to get the benefit, as prayed for, in
the Writ Petition.
6.1. It is observed that if such an application is moved
within the aforesaid time period, Opp. Party No. 1 shall do
well to take a lawful decision on the same within a period of
three (3) months from the date of receipt of such
application. The order so passed by Opp. Party No. 1 be
communicated to the Petitioner.
6.2. It is further observed that relevancy and effect of the
judgment available under Anenxure-13 be taken into
considerate, if it is applicable to the claim of the present
Petitioner. Petitioner is directed to provide a copy of this
order along with Annexure-13.
6.3. The Writ Petition accordingly stands disposed of.
(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy)
Judge
sangita
Reason: authentication of order
Location: high court of orissa, cuttack
Date: 12-Jan-2026 17:13:58
