IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.A. No.1920 of 2024 State of Odisha and Others …. Appellants Mr. S.K. Jee, AGA <<<< -versus- Dulei Naik …. Respondent Mr. S. Patra, Advocate ,, W.A. No.2046 of 2024 State of Odisha and Others …. Appellants Mr. S.K. Jee, AGA <<<< -versus- Surendranath Behera …. Respondent Mr. S. Patra, Advocate W.A. No.2284 of 2024 State of Odisha and Others …. Appellants Mr. S.K. Jee, AGA <<<< -versus- Damodar Hati …. Respondent Mr. S. Patra, Advocate CORAM: JUSTICE KRISHNA S. DIXIT JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH Order No. ORDER 14.05.2026 01. Heard learned counsel for both the Parties. Delay is condoned. In the present batch of Writ Appeals, namely W.A. No.1920 of 2024, W.A. No.2046 of 2024 and W.A. No.2284 of 2024, challenge is laid to the orders passed in W.P.(C) No.23142 of 2023, W.P.(C) No.29759 of 2024 and W.P.(C) (OAC) No.410 of 2022, respectively. Since the issue involved in these Appeals are substantially similar to the one considered and disposed of in W.A. No.1384 of 2024 and connected matters, the same are taken up together for analogous disposal. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the Respondents submits that the issues arising in the present Appeals are squarely covered by the common judgment dated 06.05.2026 passed in W.A. No.1384 of 2024 and cognate matters, wherein similar Appeals preferred by the State were disposed of against the Appellants following the earlier judgment dated 26.03.2026 rendered in W.A. Nos.676, 677, 683, 686, 688, 690, 2135, 277 of 2024 and W.A. No.815 of 2025. It is contended that the principle of parity warrants identical treatment in the present matters as well. 3. We find force in the said submission. It hardly needs to be stated that cases resting on identical factual and legal foundations should receive similar treatment, the principle of parity and equality being embedded in Articles 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution of India. No distinguishing feature has been demonstrated by the learned counsel for the Appellants-State so as to persuade us to take a different view in the present batch of Appeals. 4. It is therefore apposite to reproduce paragraphs-5 and 6 of the order passed in W.A. No.1384 of 2024 and connected matters: “5. Taking cue from the aforesaid principles, learned counsel for the Respondents contends that cases resting on identical factual and legal foundations must receive identical treatment, and that the operative directions issued in the cognate matters ought to be incorporated in the present order as well. We find substantial merit in the said submission and are in respectful agreement with the contention advanced on behalf of the Respondents. In the aforesaid circumstances, the present Appeals are disposed off in terms of the orders passed in Narusu Pradhan vs. State of Orissa (supra) and Basanti Das vs. State of Odisha (supra), and shall be governed by the same directions and consequences as expounded therein. The entire exercise of extending the benefit be completed within a period of eight weeks.” 5. In view of the above and applying the very same reasoning, the present Writ Appeals, namely W.A. No.1920 of 2024, W.A. No.2046 of 2024 and W.A. No.2284 of 2024, stand disposed of in the same terms and with the directions as contained in the order passed in W.A. No.1384 of 2024 and connected matters. The Appellants shall implement the orders impugned herein within an outer limit of eight (8) weeks from the date of this order. All pending I.A.s in each of the Writ Appeal are also disposed of accordingly. Web copy of this order be acted upon by all concerned. (Krishna S. Dixit) Judge (Chittaranjan Dash) Judge Bijay/Sarbani Designation: Junior Stenographer