[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Sri Priyaranjan Rath vs Union Of India And Others ..... Opposite ... on 13 March, 2026
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.7993 of 2026
Sri Priyaranjan Rath ..... Petitioner
Represented by Adv. -
Mr. Durgesh Narayan Rath
-versus-
Union of India and others ..... Opposite Parties
Represented by Adv. -
Mr. P.K. Parhi, DSGI along
with Mr. Deepak Gochhayat,
CGC for O.P. No.1
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA
ORDER
13.03.2026
Order No.
01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement
(Virtual /Physical Mode).
2. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as
Mr. P.K. Parhi, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India
along with Mr. Deepak Gochhayat, learned Central
Government Counsel appearing for the Opposite Party No.1.
Perused the writ petition as well as the documents annexed
thereto.
3. By filing the present writ petition, the Petitioner has
sought for the following reliefs:-
"Under the above circumstances, it is
humbly prayed that the writ petition may be
allowed;
And
(A) a writ of Mandamus or an appropriate writ
may be issued directing the opposite parties to
regularize the services of the petitioner as
Assistant Professor in the subject Dharma Shastra
from the date of his initial appointment as the
services of similarly situated contractual Guest
Faculty / Assistant Professors have been
regularized by the Central Sanskrit University,
New Delhi, with all consequential service and
financial benefits in consonance with the
judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in
the case of Jaggo Vs. Union of India and others
(S.L.P. (C) No.5580 of 2024 disposed of on
20.12.2024), in the case of Shripal and another Vs.
Nagar Nigam, Ghaziabad (Civil Appeal No.8157
of 2024 disposed of on 31.01.2025), in the case of
Dharam Singh and others Vs. State of Uttar
Pradesh and another (Civil Appeal No.8558 of
2018 decided on 19.08.2025) and in the case of
Bhola Nath Vs. The State of Jharkhand and others
(SLP (Civil) No.30762 of 2024 disposed of on
30.01.2026), within a time to be stipulated by this
Hon'ble Court;
(B) And any other order / orders or direction /
directions may be issued so as to give complete
relief to the petitioner."
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at the outset,
contended that being aggrieved by the inaction of the
Opposite Parties in regularising the service of the Petitioner
as Assistant Professor in the subject of Dharma Shastra by
the Opposite Party No.2- Central Sanskrit University, New
Delhi, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the
present writ petition. Learned counsel for the Petitioner
further submitted that in a similar writ petition in the case of
Sri Ajaynanda Sahoo v. Union of India and others decided
in W.P.(C) No.6481 of 2026 vide order dated 26.02.2026,
this Court, by virtue of an elaborate order and after taking
into consideration the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court on the subject of regularization, directed the Opposite
Party No.2-University to consider the case of the Petitioner.
He further contended that the present Petitioner stands in
similar footing with the Petitioner in W.P.(C) No.6481 of
2026. He further contended that although the Petitioner
ventilating his grievance has already approached the
Opposite Party No.2-University by filing a detailed
representation dated 02.02.2026 at Annexure-5 to the writ
petition, however no final decision has been taken thereon.
5. Considering the submission made by the learned
counsels appearing for both the sides and on a careful
examination of the background facts of the present case,
further taking note of the limited nature of the grievance
involved in the present writ petition and keeping in view the
order dated 26.02.2026 passed by this Court in W.P.(C)
No.6481 of 2026 in respect of the self-same University, this
Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ petition in terms
of the order dated 26.02.2026 passed by this Court in
W.P.(C) No.6481 of 2026 and thereby directing the
Opposite Party No.2 to consider the representation of the
Petitioner dated 02.02.2026 at Annexure-5 in the light of the
order dated order dated 26.02.2026 passed by this Court in
W.P.(C) No.6481 of 2026 within a period of eight weeks
from the date of communication of a certified copy of this
order. The representation of the Petitioner shall be
considered and disposed of by passing a speaking and
reasoned order. The final decision so taken on such
representation be communicated to the Petitioner within ten
days thereafter. It is further directed that since the grievance
of the Petitioner is pending before the Opposite Party No.2
and this Court directs consideration of such grievance, the
services of the Petitioner shall not be dispensed with for the
period of three months.
6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ
petition stands disposed of.
(Aditya Kumar Mohapatra )
Judge
Debasis
