IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.14693 of 2024 Geetarani Gharai ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Laxmikanta Mohanty -versus-

State Of Orissa & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv. - Mr. S.Behera, A.G.A.

CORAM:

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No. 18.02.2026

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

2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the State. Perused the writ application as well as the prayer made therein.

3. By filing the present writ application, the Petitioner has prayed for the following relief: -

“It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue notice to the opp.parties calling upon them to file show cause as to why:

i) a direction shall not be issued for quashing of order of rejection dated 28.05.2024 issued by the opp.party no.l under Annexure-16., taking into consideration the order passed by this Hon'ble Court in W.P.(C) No.3715 of 2019 under Annexure -13 and order passed under Annexure- 14 as well as the order passed by Hon'ble Apex Court of India in SLP (Civil) Diary No.35374 of

2023 under Annexure-15.

ii) And after hearing the parties be pleased to quash/set aside the order of rejection dated 28.05.2024 under Annexure -16 and direct the opp.parties to count the entire period of service of the petitioner from the date of her initial appointment as Resource Teacher dated 12.08.1993 to 31.08.2017 for the purpose of fixation of pay seniority and other financial benefits as well as enrolment of her name under OCS (Pension) Rule 1992 and release pension and pensionary benefits in her favour with effect from

01.02.2017 along with all arrears.

iii) The opp.parties be directed to calculate and release all arrears of the petitioner, including pensionary benefits and release in her favour within a date to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court. And pass such other order/orders granting complete relief to the petitioner.”

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that by filing the present writ application, the Petitioner has prayed for a direction to quash the order of rejection dated 28.05.2024, whereby the Opposite Party No.1 has rejected the prayer of the Petitioner for grant of service benefits by taking into consideration the entire period of service of the Petitioner. He further submitted that earlier the petitioner had approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.32920 of 2021 which was disposed of on 06.04.2023, thereby granting liberty to the Petitioner to approach the Opposite Parties for redressal of his grievance. Thereafter, the Opposite Party No.1 considered the case of the Petitioner and, vide the impugned order dated 28.05.2024 at Annexure-16, rejected the prayer of the Petitioner on the ground that the appointment of the Petitioner was under a particular scheme. As such, the Petitioner could not have claimed the regularisation of his service as a matter of right after winding of the said project. While rejecting the claim of the Petitioner the Opposite Parties have also referred to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Secretary, State of Karnataka –v.- Uma Devi, reported in (2006) 4 SCC 1 as well as the State of Orissa & Ors vs. Dipti Paul reported in 2000 (10) SCC 413 and in the case of Delhi Development Horticulture Employee’s Union vs. Delhi Administration, Delhi & Ors. reported in (1992) 4 SCC 99. Being aggrieved by such order passed by the Opposite Party No.1 thereby rejecting the prayer of the Petitioner for regularisation of her service, the Petitioner has again approached this Court by filing the present writ application challenging the impugned rejection order dated 28.05.2024 at Annexure-16 to the writ application.

5. In course of his argument learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted before this Court that an identical issue was directly and substantially in issue before this Court in a batch of writ applications