IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C) No. 34865 of 2023

In the matter of an application under Articles 226 & 227 of the

Constitution of India.

………………

Trinath Mishra …. Petitioner

-versus-

State of Odisha & Ors. …. Opposite Parties

For Petitioner : Mr. D. Mohapatra, Sr. Advocate

along with

Mr. J. Barik, Advocate

For Opp. Parties : Mr. C.K. Pradhan

Addl. Govt. Advocate

PRESENT:

THE HON’BLE JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

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

Date of Hearing: 04.12.2025 & Date of Judgment: 04.12.2025

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

Biraja Prasanna Satapathy, J

1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2. Heard Mr. D.N. Mahapatra, learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the Petitioner along with Mr. J. Barik, learned counsel and Mr. C.K.

Pradhan, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate appearing for the State-Opp.

Parties.

3. The present writ petition has been filed inter alia challenging order dtd.21.02.2022 so issued by the Govt.-Opp. Party No. 1 under Annexure-3 and rejection of the prayer of the Petitioner for his reinstatement vide order dtd.07.08.2023 under Annexure-6. In terms of order dtd.21.02.2022 so issued under Annexure-3, Petitioner was given premature retirement in terms of the provisions contained under Rule 71(a) of the Odisha Service Code (in short Code)

w.e.f.21.02.2022.

4. It is the case of the Petitioner that Petitioner entered into service as S.I. of Police, where he joined on 16.08.1985. While so continuing Petitioner was promoted to the rank of Inspector of Police w.e.f.28.02.2004 and to the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police w.e.f.30.12.2011. Petitioner while so continuing was given further promotion to the rank of Addl. Superintendent of Police w.e.f.31.12.2018.

4.1. It is contended that taking into account the exemplary service career of the Petitioner, Petitioner was recommended for award of President’s Police Medal for distinguish service on the occasion of Republic Day, 2020 on 05.11.2019 under Annexure-8 series. Not only that Petitioner was also recommended to get the benefit of super time scale in the rank of Addl. Superintendent of Police vide order dtd.16.11.2021 under Annexure-7 series.

4.2. Learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that with such exemplary service career all through Petitioner because of his implication in Cuttack Vigilance P.S. Case No. 13/22 dtd.16.02.2022 under Sec. 13(2) r.w. 13(1)(b)/12 of the P.C. Act, his name was recommended to the Review Committee to give premature retirement in terms of the provisions contained under Rule 71(a) of the Code. The Review Committee in its proceeding dtd.19.02.2022 under Annexure-9 series when recommended to give premature retirement to the Petitioner, Petitioner was given such retirement vide the impugned order dtd.21.02.2022 under Annexure-3.

4.3. It is contended that seeking his reinstatement with quashing of order dtd.21.02.2022, Petitioner initially made a representation before Opp. Party No. 1 under Annexure-4 and thereafter approached this Court seeking its consideration in W.P.(C) No. 12883 of 2023. This Court vide order dtd.01.05.2023 under Annexure-5, when directed for its consideration, the same was rejected vide order dtd.07.08.2023 under Annexure-6.

4.4. It is the main contention of the learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the Petitioner that save and except the implication of the Petitioner in Cuttack Vigilance P.S. Case No.13/2022 dtd.16.02.2022 Petitioner was never proceeded with in any departmental or criminal proceeding as he was given promotion all though with his name being recommended to get the President’s medal as well as to get the benefit of super time scale of pay in the rank of Addl. Superintendent of Police. It is accordingly contended that only on his implication in the aforesaid vigilance case, Petitioner’s name could not have been recommended to the Review Committee for giving premature retirement