WP(C)/23950/2026 of DASARATHI BARIK Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 20 August 2026

ORDER

20.08.2026

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

2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties.

3. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer:- “In the above facts and circumstances, it is therefore most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to:

(i) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Opposite Parties to consider and finalize the case of the petitioner for absorption/selection to the post of Accountant- cum-Data Entry Operator (ADEO) in terms of the Odisha Accountant-cum-Data Entry Operator (Method of Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, taking into consideration of petitioner's 16 years of continuous service, earlier order dated 04.04.2025 passed in W.P.(C) No.8872/2025 and order dated 26.09.2025 passed by Opp. Party No.2;

// 2 //

(ii) Issue a direction to the Opposite Parties not to deny the petitioner's absorption solely on the ground of pendency of vigilance investigation in absence of submission of charge sheet;

(iii) Pass such other order(s) or direction(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.”

4. It is contended that while complying the order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.8872 of 2025, Opp. Party No.2 vide his order dated 26.09.2025 under Annexure-10, though recommended the name of the petitioner for his absorption as against the post of Accountant-cum-Data Entry Operator (ADEO) to the Govt.-O.P. No.1, but till date no action is being taken on such recommendation made by Opp. Party No.2 under Annexure-10.

4.1. It is further contended that on receipt of such recommendation, vide letter dated 27.11.2025 under Annexure-12, Opp. Party No.1 when requested O.P. No.2 to comply certain queries, vide letter dated 05.12.2025 under Annexure-13, all such queries were complied. However, on the face of such compliance, recommendation made by the Collector is yet to be complied with.

4.2. It is also contended that even though a Vigilance Proceeding has been initiated against the petitioner in Bhubaneswar Vigilance P.S. Case No.46 of 2022 but

// 3 //

the investigation of the same is under progress and no charge-sheet has yet been filed.

4.3. It is accordingly contended that since on the face of the recommendation made by the Collector under Annexure-10 and compliance of the queries made by the Govt., petitioner is yet to get the benefit of absorption, Opp. Party No.1 be directed to take a decision with regard to the recommendation so made within a stipulated time period.

5. Learned Addl. Standing Counsel on the other hand contended that since a Vigilance Proceeding is pending against the petitioner, Govt. has not yet taken any decision in considering the recommendation made by the Collector under Annexure-10.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, considering the submission made and taking into account the nature of order passed by the Collector- Opp. Party No.2 under Annexure-10, this Court directs Opp. Party No.1 to take a final decision on the petitioner’s claim to get the benefit of absorption as against the post of Accountant-cum-Data Entry Operator as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of 2(two) months from the date of receipt of this order. Opp. Party No.1 is further directed to take into consideration the fact that no charge-sheet has yet

// 4 //

been filed in the Vigilance Proceeding against the petitioner while considering the recommendation.

7. The Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy)

Judge Basudev Digitally Signed Signed by: BASUDEV SWAIN Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 21-Aug-2026 16:44:36 Signature Not Verified