[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Makaranda Bhoi And Another vs State Of Odisha And Others ..... ... on 2 May, 2026
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.10316 of 2026
Makaranda Bhoi and another ..... Petitioners
Represented by Adv. -
Dipti Ranjan Mohapatra
-versus-
State Of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties
Mr. A. Mohanty, ASC
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
MOHAPATRA
ORDER
02.05.2026
Order No.
01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners as well as learned
counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ application
as well as the documents annexed thereto.
3. The Petitioners have filed the present writ application with the
following prayer:
"It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble court
may graciously be pleased to issue rule NISI
calling upon the Opp. Parties to file show cause
as to why the petitioners shall not b entitled to
get the full relief form date of their entire into
service that is from the date of initial
engagement is Jr. Asst. with all service and
consequential benefits and that directs shall not
be issue to regularize the services of the
petitioners form the date of initial engagement
as Jr. Asst. by extending all services and
consequential benefits.
If the Opp. Parties file to show cause or show
insufficient cause make the rule absolute by
issuing writ/ writs commanding Opp. Parties to
grant full relief to petitioners form the date of
their entire into the service, i.e., form date of
initial engagement as Jr. Asst. followed by
release of all service and consequential benefits
within a time bound manner.
And further be pleased to pass any other a
writ/ a writ passed any other order/orders,
direction/ directions as this Hon'ble court may
deem just and proper Bonafide interest of
Justice."
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioners at the outset contended
that the Petitioners pursuant to an advertisement issued by Odisha
Staff Selection Commission for recruitment to the post of Junior
Assistant participated in the recruitment process. He further
contended that although the Petitioners were selected, however, due
to the austerity measures imposed by the State Government by virtue
of notification dated 16.07.1999 the Petitioners, though selected,
were not given appointment. Thereafter, the Finance Department by
virtue of notification dated 06.01.2003 permitted one-time
appointment of 66 selected candidates on consolidated remuneration
of Rs.4000/- per month. Accordingly, the Petitioners were given
appointment as Junior Assistant in the year 2003.
5. While this was the position, the Finance Department again
came up with another notification dated 13.09.2006, thereby
abolishing all contractual appointments. Being aggrieved by such
inaction of the Finance Department, the Petitioners initially
approached the learned Odisha Administrative Tribunal with a
prayer for grant of regular scale of pay prospectively. Such O.A.
filed before the Tribunal was partly allowed. Thereafter, challenging
the order of Tribunal both the State-Opposite Parties as well as the
Petitioners have approached this Court. It is stated by the learned
counsel for the Petitioners that once both the writ petitions were
dismissed, the Petitioners approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court by
filing an appeal which was registered as SLP(C) No.7117-7118 of
2020. The Hon'ble Supreme Court by virtue of order dated
14.02.2023 while setting aside the order passed by the High Court
remanded the matter for fresh consideration on merit. After the SLP
was remanded, the writ petition was again listed for hearing.
However, owing to non-prosecution of the same, it was dismissed
due to default vide order dated 13.04.2023. Thereafter, the
Petitioners filed an application for restoration of the writ petition
which was registered as CMAPL No.444 of 2023. On perusal of the
order dated 14.11.2023, it appears that the Hon'ble Division Bench
dismissed the CMAPL application on the ground of delay.
Subsequently, the Petitioners again approached the Hon'ble
Supreme Court by filing SLP (Civil) Diary No.47076 of 2024. The
SLP was dismissed vide order dated 25.04.2025.
6. In course of his argument, learned counsel for the Petitioners,
drawing attention of this Court to the judgment in W.P.(C)
No.22142 of 2010 and a batch of writ applications decided vide a
common judgment dated 12.02.2026 at Annexure-14, contended
before this Court that some of the similarly situated employees
approached this Court by filing the batch of writ applications. A
Division Bench of this Court, by virtue of a common judgment dated
12.02.2026, allowed all service benefits including the continuity of
service except the financial benefits to the Petitioners in those cases
who stand in a similar footing to the present Petitioners. In view of
the aforesaid judgment dated 12.02.2026 at Annexure-14 the
Petitioners have once again approached this Court with a prayer to
get similar benefits as has been granted to the Petitioners in the
above noted batch of writ applications which were disposed of vide
judgment dated 12.02.2026.
7. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that
the prayer of the Petitioners was earlier agitated and the same has
attained finality after dismissal of the writ application which was
eventually confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In such view
of the matter, learned counsel for the State contended that the
Petitioners are not entitled to the benefits as has been claimed in the
present writ application. On such ground, learned counsel for the
State contended that the present writ petition is devoid of merit, and
accordingly, the same should be dismissed.
8. Having heard the submissions made by the learned counsels
appearing for the respective parties, on a careful examination of the
background facts as well as the documents annexed to the writ
application, further taking note of the orders passed by several
forums including the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, this Court is
of the view that in the first round of litigation the prayer of the
Petitioners was different from the prayer made in the present writ
application. Moreover, the present writ application is based on a
subsequent cause of action after similar benefits were extended in
favour of similarly situated employees by virtue of the common
judgment dated 12.02.2026 at Annexure-14. On a careful analysis of
the factual background of the present case, this Court is of the view
that similarly situated employees shall be treated similarly and be
extended with similar benefits, otherwise the same would create a
discrimination which would be hit by the principle of Article 14 &
16 of the Constitution of India. In the instant case the Petitioners are
citing the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court dated
12.02.2026 and claiming benefit as has been extended in favour of
the similarly situated employees. Taking into consideration the
subsequent development, this Court is of the view that the claim of
the Petitioners needs to be considered by the Opposite Parties
keeping in view the judgment dated 12.02.2026.
9. In view of the aforesaid analysis of the factual as well as legal
position, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ petition by
granting liberty to the Petitioners to approach the Opposite Party
No.3 by filing a detailed representation taking therein all the grounds
along with all supporting documents within three weeks from today.
In such eventuality, the Opposite Party No.3 shall consider the case
of the Petitioners keeping in view the judgment dated 12.02.2026 at
Annexure-14 to the writ petition. The Petitioners be treated at par
with similarly situated employees. Further, while considering the
representation of the Petitioners, if the Opposite Party No.3 comes to
a conclusion that the Petitioners stand in a similar footing with the
Petitioners in the common judgment dated 12.02.2026, then similar
benefits be extended in their favour and the representation filed by
the Petitioners be disposed of by passing a speaking and reasoned
order within a period of three months from the date of
communication of a certified copy of today's order. The final
decision so taken be communicated to the Petitioner within ten days
thereafter.
10. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ
application stands disposed of.
Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.
( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra )
Judge
S.K. Rout
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 06-May-2026 10:06:14
