IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.31767 of 2025 Krishna Chandra Sahu …. Petitioner Mr. S.C. Sahoo, Advocate -versus-

State of Odisha & Ors. …. Opposite Parties Mr. C.K. Pradhan, AGA CORAM:

JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

ORDER

16.12.2025 Order No.

02. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode.

2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties.

3. Pursuant to the order dtd.08.12.2025, learned Addl. Government Advocate produced the instruction so provided by the Superintending Engineer, MI Division, Jeypore. The same be kept in record.

4. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer:-

“It is, therefore, humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to:-

1). direct the opp. parties to regularise the petitioner in service for a day prior to his superannuation notionally and grant pension and pensionary benefits under the old rule taking into consideration his initial appointment 01.03.1987 in the light of the decision of this Hon’ble court in W.P.(C) No.29993 of 2022; Khageswar Jena v.

State of Odisha & others vide order dated 18.11.2022, which has been affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme court in SLP(C) Diary No. 12669 of 2024, decided on 24.07.2025 as well as the benefits given to similarly situated persons and thereby quash the order dated

26.08.2025 vide Annexure-7;

ii). Pass such other order/direction(s) as would be deem fit and proper in the bona fide interest of justice;

And for which act of kindness, the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.”

5. It is contended that claim of the Petitioner pursuant to the earlier order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.31376 of 2024 was rejected vide the impugned order dtd.26.08.2025 under Annexure-7.

5.1. It is contended that Petitioner while continuing as a NMR in MI Division, Jeypore w.e.f. 01.03.1987 was brought over to the worked charged establishment as a Mate w.e.f. 22.01.2010. However, while continuing as such in the work-charged establishment, he retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on

30.06.2022.

5.2. It is contended that, even though Petitioner prior to his retirement had moved the authorities time and again seeking his regularization, but the same was never considered. Accordingly, after his retirement, Petitioner again raised his claim to get the benefit of absorption in the regular establishment for the purpose of getting the benefit of pension & pensionary benefits under the OCS (Pension) Rules, 1992. As the same was not considered, he approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.31376 of

2024. This Court vide order dtd.02.01.2025 directed Opposite Party No.1, to consider the Petitioner’s claim in the light of the orders passed by this Court in the case of Pradip Kumar Panigrahi vs. State of Orissa & Ors. But without proper appreciation of the Petitioner’s claim and the decision rendered in the case of Pradip Kumar Panigrahi, claim of the Petitioner was rejected vide the impugned order dtd.26.08.2025 under Annexure-7.

5.3. It is however contended that in view of the recent decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Odisha & Ors. G. Balakrishna, wherein similar claim allowed by this Court in the case of Khageswar Jena and in other Writ Petitions have been upheld, the ground on which claim of the Petitioner was rejected vide the impugned order dtd.26.08.2025 under Annexure-7, is no more sustainable and it requires interference of this Court.

6. Mr. C.K. Pradhan, learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State basing on the instruction on the other hand contended that since Petitioner during his entire service career never raised a claim to get the benefit of absorption in the regular establishment and such a claim was made after his retirement on 30.06.2022, Petitioner’s claim has been rightly rejected vide the impugned order dtd.26.08.2025 under Annexure-7.

6.1. It is also contended that such a rejection has been made, placing reliance on the decision