IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.A. No. 1748 of 2022

1. State of Orissa represented through Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Water Resources Department, Rajiv Bhawan, Bhubaneswar

2. Engineer-in-Chief, Water Resources Department, Bhubaneswar

3. Chief Engineer, Drainage Division, District-Cuttack

4. Executive Engineer, Drainage Division, Berhampur, District-Ganjam …. Appellants Mr. S.N. Biswal, ASC -versus-

Sri Rama Chandra Sahu …. Respondent Mr. G.K. Nanda, Advocate CORAM:

JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO Order No. ORD ER

02. 09.12.2025 I.A. No. 4085 of 2022

1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2. This is an application for condonation of delay of 65 days in filing the writ appeal.

3. Mr. S.N. Biswal, learned Additional Standing Counsel submits that due to delay in obtaining the sanction for filing an appeal from the concerned Department, some delay occurred in filing the writ appeal. He further submits that relevant documents could not be arranged immediately to file the writ appeal. Thus, the delay in filing the writ appeal is bona fide and not intentional. 4. Mr. G.K. Nanda, learned counsel for the Respondent submits that he has no objection for condonation of delay. The writ appeals involving similar issue have already been disposed of. Hence by condoning the delay, the writ appeal may be taken up for final disposal.

5. Taking note of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, the delay in filing the writ appeal is condoned.

6. I.A. is disposed of accordingly.

(K.R. Mohapatra)

Judge (Savitri Ratho)

Judge W.A. No. 1748 of 2022

03. 1. On consent of learned counsel for the parties, the writ appeal is taken up for final disposal.

2. Order dated 16^th September, 2022 (Annexure-1) passed by learned Single Judge in WPC (OA) No. 2562 of 2014 is under challenge in this Intra-Court Appeal.

2.1. Learned Single Judge in order under Annexure-1 relying upon the judgment dated 11^th June, 2009 passed in O.A. No.1189 (C) of 2006 passed by Odisha Administrative Tribunal, in the case of Narasu Pradhan vs. State of Odisha and Others held that the Respondent (Applicant therein) being on similar footing is entitled to all the service benefits extended to Narasu Pradhan and also directed to release the consequential as well as differential benefits as due and admissible to the Respondent within a period of four months from the date of communication of the impugned order. The judgment dated 11^th June, 2009 passed in Narasu Pradhan (supra) directing to regularize the services of the Applicant therein in any vacant post after the completion of five years as work-charged employee, to grant him notional increment as due from time to time and to release all the retiral benefits, was challenged by the State of Odisha in W.P.(C) No. 5377 of 2010, which was dismissed vide order dated 19^th December, 2011.

3. The State of Odisha being not satisfied preferred SLP(C) No. 22498 of 2012 which was also dismissed on 7^th January, 2013. Thereafter, the State implemented the judgment passed by the Odisha Administrative Tribunal by extending all the benefits and releasing retiral benefit to said Narasu Pradhan vide office order No.2858 dated 9^th May, 2013. Learned counsel for the Respondent also drew attention of this Court to orders passed in similar such cases, wherein the Respondents therein have already received retiral benefits after dismissal of the SLP(C)s filed by the State of Odisha before Hon'ble Supreme Court.

4. In view of the above, Mr. G.K. Nanda, learned counsel for the Respondent submits that the Writ Appeal merits no consideration and is liable to be dismissed.

5. Mr. Biswal, learned Additional Standing Counsel does not dispute the factual as well as legal position. It is his submission that in similar such cases, after dismissal of the SLP(C)s/Appeals by the Hon'ble Supreme Court filed by the State Government, the order of the Tribunal has already been implemented by releasing pensionary benefit in respect of the Respondents