The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Petitioners' service should have been regularized as they were engaged against sanctioned posts by following due process of selection and have been continuing for more than 16 years. The Court emphasized that the Petitioners' right to seek for regularization of services cannot be set at naught by relying on a clause that they cannot ask for regularization.

JUDGMENT :

B.R. SARANGI, J.

1. Of the nineteen Writ Petitions, as mentioned above, W.P. (C) No. 18659 of 2016 has been filed by the applicants in O.A. No. 2176 (C) of 2014, whereas W.P. (C) No. 18660 of 2016 has been filed by the applicants in T.A. No. 7 (C) of 2016 and W.P. (C) No. 18661 of 2016 has been filed by the applicants in O.A. No. 2177 (C) of 2016. In these three Writ Petitions, the Petitioners have assailed the advertisement dated 26.02.2014 issued by Opposite Party No. 4 as well as the common order dated 03.10.2016 passed by the Orissa Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack in the aforementioned Original Applications, which have been respectively marked as Annexure-12 and Annexure-15 to W.P. (C) No. 18659 of 2016. The Petitioners have also prayed for quashing of Clauses-2 and 3 of the Notification dated 04.01.2011 issued by the Government of Orissa, Industries Department under Annexure-10 to W.P. (C) No. 18659 of 2016, since the same is contrary to Article 320 of the Constitution of India and OPSC (Limitation of Functions) Regulations, 1989; and to direct the Opposite Parties to regularize their service against the posts in which they have been continuing and to grant all consequential service as well as financial benefits, as due and admissible to them in accordance with law.

2. CONTC No. 61 of 2017, listed with the above three Writ Petitions, was filed alleging violation of the interim order passed by this Court. Since the main issue is going to be decided in the above three Writ Petitions, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners of the Contempt Petition submits that they do not want to press the Contempt Petition, which is accordingly disposed of.

3. In course of hearing, it was brought to the notice of this Court that challenging the advertisement on similar counts, the Petitioners of the above three Writ Petitions have also filed number of Writ Petitions, i.e. W.P. (C) No. 1998 of 2022 and batch, and accordingly on 28.06.2022, this Court passed the following order:

“W.P. (C) No. 18659 of 2016, W.P. (C) No. 18660 of 2016 and W.P. (C) No. 18661 of 2016

1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2. Heard Mr. B. Routray, learned Senior Counsel appearing along with Mr. S. Sekhar, learned counsel for the Petitioners in W.P. (C) No. 18659 of 2016; Mr. J. Pattnaik, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Mr. A. Pattnaik, learned counsel for the Petitioner in W.P. (C) No. 18660 of 2016; Mr. M. Mishra, learned Sr. Counsel appearing along with Mr. T. Mishra, learned counsel for the Petitioner in W.P. (C) No. 18661 of 2016; Mr. S. Palit, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the College; Mr. S.J. Mohanty, learned counsel appearing for BPUT and Mr. A.K. Mishra, learned Additional Government Advocate.

3. After some arguments were advanced, it is brought to the notice of this Court that challenging the very same advertisement, the Petitioners have filed W.P. (C) No. 1998 of 2022 and batch of cases, wherein this Court granted interim order and subsequently the Government has withdrawn the advertisement.

4. As prayed for by learned counsel for the parties, put up this matter next week along with W.P. (C) Nos. 269, 1998, 1999, 2001, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2087, 2090, 2093, 2139, 2209, 3470, 3581 and 10931 of 2022.

5. Additional affidavit filed on behalf of opposite party no. 4-Govt. College of Engineering, Keonjhar be kept on record.”

Pursuant to such order, the connected matters have been listed today. But at the outset, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners in all those Writ Petitions contended that since the advertisements under challenge have been withdrawn, no cause of action subsists to be adjudicated in those Writ Petitions. Accordingly the connected Writ Petitions, i.e. W.P. (C) No. 31231 of 2011 and W.P. (C) Nos. 269, 1998, 1999, 2001, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2087, 2090, 2093, 2139, 2209, 3470 and 3581 of 2022, are disposed of as not pressed.

4. In view of the above, only three Writ Petitions, viz. W.P. (C