WP(C)/35260/2020 of KABIRAJ SABAR Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 17 August 2026

ORDER

17.08.2026

08. 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:- “ It is, therefore, most humbly prayed that Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit writ application, issue rule Nisi calling upon opposite parties to show cause as to why the prayers made hereunder be not allowed, Upon showing insufficient cause/ no cause make the said Rule absolute, issue writ/ writs in the nature of

i. writ of mandamus directing the opp. Parties to treat the petitioner as regular Pharmacist by declaring that the decision of the opp. party No.3 dtd. 30.12.2006 appointing the petitioner on regular basis as Pharmacist w.e.f.1.1.2007 to be valid, proper and justified and be further pleased to quash the decision of opp. party No.2

// 2 //

dtd. 18.8.2020 along with the consequential order dtd. 03.12.2020 issued by Opp. Party no.3 at Annexure 12 and 14 respectively.

ii. And to further declare that the decision of opp. party No.1 dtd. 26.10.2004 is no more in force after the decision of opp. party No.1 dtd.21.12.2006 directing the opp. party No.3 to consider the representation of the petitioner in compliance with the order of the passed in learned tribunal dtd. 16.8.2004 Ο.Α.1688(C)/2004 as well as keeping in view the restriction in Section 3(c)/3(d) of ORV Act 1975.

And/or may pass such other writ/ writs, order/orders, direction/ directions as this Hon'ble Court may think fit and proper for the ends of justice.

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

4. It is contended that similar order passed under Annexure-14 was the subject matter of challenge in W.P.(C) No.37692 of 2020 (Bindu Raj vs. State of Odisha & Ors.). This Court vide order dtd.20.03.2026 while quashing the impugned order in the case of Bindu Raj so reflected at SL. No.1 of Annexure-14, issued various direction for release of all consequential service and financial benefits. Order passed in the said Writ Petition in Para-8 reads as follows:- “8. In the result, the writ petition stands allowed. As a necessary corollary, the impugned order dated 3rd December, 2020 by opposite party No.3 as at Annexure-8 is hereby quashed. It is further directed that opposite party No.3 shall immediately release all the consequential service and financial benefits to the petitioner as she is entitled to as per Annexure-7 and to conclude the above exercise as soon as possible preferably by the end of April, 2026.”

// 3 //

4.1. It is also contended that Petitioner while working as a contractual Pharmacist though was regularized vide order dtd.30.12.2006 under Annexure-1 along with the Petitioner in W.P.(C) No.37692 of 2020 and others, but such order was cancelled vide the impugned order dtd.18.08.2020 under Annexure-12 of Opposite Party No.2, and consequential order dtd.03.12.2020 under Annexure-14 of Opposite Party No.3.

4.2. It is contended that since order at Annexure-12 was passed without following the principle of natural justice, such an order as well as consequential order under Annexure-14 are not sustainable in the eye of law, in view of the judgment delivered by this Court on 15.12.2025 in W.P.(C) No.1154 of 2021. This Court in Para-7.2. and 7.4 of the said order reads as follows:- “7.2. However, such benefit was cancelled vide the impugned order dt.11.01.2021 under Annexure-11, placing reliance on the direction issued by the Government-Opp. party No.1 in its letter dt.06.01.2021 under Anenxure-12. This Court taking into account the order of appointment issued in favour of Petitioner under Annexure-2 and the proceeding of the Selection Committee so available under Anenxure-4, is of the view that Petitioner was appointed as a Contractual Staff Nurse by facing due selection process initiated pursuant to Annexure-1 and provisions of ORV Act was adhered to. xxx xxx xxx

7.4. Since Petitioner was duly regularized after completion of 6 years of continuous engagement as a Contractual Staff Nurse and the impugned order under

// 4 //

Annexure-11, basing on the impugned letter under Annexure-12, has been issued without following the principle of natural justice, placing reliance on the decisions as cited supra, this Court is of the view that letter under Annexure-12 and consequential order impugned under Annexure-11 could not have been issued/passed”.

4.3. It is also contended that while issuing notice of the Writ Petition vide order dtd.15.12.2020, this Court stayed the operation of the order under Annexure-14.

4.4. Making all the submissions, it is contended that the impugned order passed under Annexure-12 and consequential order passed under Annexure-14 are no more sustainable in the eye of law and require interference of this Court.

5. Learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State on the other hand while supporting the impugned order made his submission basing on the stand taken in the counter affidavit so filed. Though it is not disputed that Petitioner along with others were regularized as against the post of Pharmacist vide order dtd.30.12.2006 under Annexure-11, but since it was found that Petitioner is not eligible to get the benefit, the same was cancelled vide order dtd.18.08.2020 under Annexure-12 and consequential order passed on 03.12.2020 under Annexure-14.

5.1. It is contended that since Petitioner on the face of his ineligibility was extended with the benefit of

// 5 //

regularization vide order under Annexure-11, the same was rightly cancelled with passing of the impugned order dtd.18.08.2020 under Annexure-12 of Opposite Party No.2 and consequential order passed by Opposite Party No.3 on 03.12.2020 under Annexure-14. It is accordingly contended that no interference is called for.

6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made, this Court finds that Petitioner while continuing as a contractual Pharmacist pursuant to the order of the Government issued on 31.05.1999 under Annexure-2, Petitioner along with others were regularized vide order dtd.30.12.2006 of Opposite Party No.3 under Annexure-11. However, said order of regularization was cancelled in respect of the Petitioner by Opposite Party No.2 vide its order dtd.18.08.2020 under Annexure-12. Basing on the such order passed by Opposite Party No.2, consequential order cancelling the order of regularization was made by Opposite Party No.3 vide order dtd.03.12.2020 under Annexure-14.

6.1. As found order dtd.03.12.2020, was the subject matter of challenge in W.P.(C) No.37692 of 2020. This Court vide order dtd.20.03.2026, while quashing order dtd.03.12.2020, directed the Opposite Parties to extend all consequential service and financial benefits.

// 6 //

6.2. It is also found that Petitioner though was regularized along with others vide order dtd.30.12.2016 under Annexure-11, but Opposite Party No.2 passed the impugned order on 18.08.2020 under Annexure- 12, without issuing any show-cause and without giving opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner. No such material is also available in the counter affidavit so filed by Opposite Party Nos.1 and 2, showing compliance of the principle of natural justice, prior to issuance of the impugned order under Annexure-12 and consequential order under Annexure-14.

6.3. Therefore, in view of the judgment delivered by this Court in W.P.(C) No.1154 of 2021 so cited (supra) and the decision of this Court in W.P.(C) No.37692 of 2020, it is the view of this Court that the impugned orders are not sustainable in the eye of law.

6.4. In view of the aforesaid analysis, this Court while quashing order dtd.18.08.2020 so passed by Opposite Party No.2 under Annexure-12 and consequential order passed by Opposite Party No.3 on 03.12.2020 under Annexure-14, so far as it relates to the Petitioner dispose of the Writ Petition by upholding the order dtd.30.12.2006 under Annexure-11.

7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Subrat

Judge Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBRAT KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 20-Aug-2026 17:50:44 Signature Not Verified