IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C) No. 22874 of 2024

Application under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of

India.

---------------

Prativa Mohanty …. Petitioner

-versus-

State of Odisha and Others …. Opp. Parties

Advocate(s) appeared in this case:-

_______________________________________________________

For Petitioner : M/s. M.K. Mohanty, T. Pradhan

M. Mohanty, A. Mohanty &

S.D. Pattanaik, Advocates

Vs.

For Opp. Parties : Mr. S.N. Patnaik,

[Addl. Government Advocate]

__________________________________________________________

CORAM:

JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA

JUDGMENT

20.08.2025

SASHIKANTA MISHRA, J.

The petitioner in the present writ petition seeks

to challenge the order dated 03.09.2024 passed by the Collector, Kendrapara in transferring her to ICDS Project,

Kendrapara from Rajnagar ICDS Project.

2. Facts of the case, briefly stated, are that the petitioner was originally appointed as Anganwadi worker in Bhatapada Anganwadi center under Rajnagar ICDS project. While working as such, being a graduate, she was promoted to the post of Supervisor on contractual basis being duly selected by the DPC on 23.03.2010. She was posted initially at Pattamundai ICDS Project but subsequently the order being modified, she was posted at Rajnagar ICDS Project. She has been discharging her duty sincerely at that place since then. The contractual Supervisors were allowed to continue as per order dated 22.12.2014 of the Government on consolidated remuneration of Rs.9,300/- per month till further orders. While the matter stood thus, the impugned order was issued transferring the petitioner from Rajnagar ICDS Project to Kendrapara ICDS Project. Contending that the petitioner, being a contractual employee working with meager consolidated salary, such transfer would cause hardship and prejudice to her and in any case, the Orissa Children’s and Women’s Welfare Service Rules, 1989 are not applicable to her. On such facts, the petitioner has filed this writ petition with the following prayer:-

“The petitioner most respectfully prays that the Hon’ble Court may be graciously pleased to allow the writ petition, issue a writ or direction in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or direction quashing Order No. 1992/SW Dt. 03.09.2024 of Opp. Party No.2 under Annexure-3 and pass such other or further order or orders as are deemed just and proper.”

3. Counter affidavit has been filed by the opposite party Nos.2 and 3, inter alia, stating that the petitioner was being paid consolidated remuneration of Rs.21,000/- as per order dated 06.11.2021 of the government. Subsequently as per resolution dated 25.09.2024 of the Government in Women and Child Development Department as also letter dated 26.09.2024, the petitioner’s service was regularized with effect from 25.09.2024 with time scale of pay of Rs.35,400-Rs.1,12,400/- of the pay matrix of ORSP Rules, 2017. As a regular employee, all prevailing rules of government are applicable to her. As such, the prayer made in the writ petition is devoid of merit and liable to be rejected.

4. The petitioner has filed rejoinder stating that the order of transfer was issued on 03.09.2024, which was challenged in the present writ petition as, being a contractual employee she cannot be transferred from one place to another.

5. Heard Mr. M. Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.N. Patnaik, learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State.

6. Mr. Mohanty would first argue that the order of transfer was issued prior to the order of the government regularizing her services. Being a contractual employee, the petitioner could not have been transferred. Secondly, the resolution dated 25.09.2024 and letter dated 26.09.2024 of the Government clearly mention that the post in question was created only for the petitioner with the stipulation that no other employee can be appointed against such post. Further, said post would stand abolished as soon as the employee for whom it is created vacates it for any reason. Mr. Mohanty t