IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C ) No. NO.39723 OF 2021 Asmit Sahu …. Petitioner Mr. G.R. Sethi, Adv. -versus- State of Odisha …. Opposite Party Mr. P.K. Panda, ASC COROM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No ORDER 02.02.2026 9. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. Pursuant to order dt.01.09.2025, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner files a certified copy of the F.I.R and the Final Form so filed in Bhanjanagar P.S. Case No.19 dt.07.04.2015. 4. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer: It is therefore humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit the case, call for the records and after hearing both the parties pass the following reliefs; (i) To quash the order dtd.04.10.2021 under Annexure-8 (ii) To quash the order dtd.31.07.2020 under Annexure-6. (iii) To direct the Opposite Parties to re-instate the Petitioner in service. (iv) To direct the Opposite Parties to grant all financial and consequential benefits flowing from the date of re-instatement. (v) And pass such other order/orders as may be deemed fit and proper for the interest of justice.. And for this act of kindness, the Petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray. 5. It is contended that on the ground of suppression of his involvement in a Criminal case, Petitioner was removed from his services by the Disciplinary Authority- Superintendent of Police, Berhampur in exercise of power conferred under Article-311 (2) of the Constitution of India, r/w Rule-828(b) of the Orissa Police Manual. The said order was also confirmed in Appeal vide order dt.04.10.2021 under Annexure-8. 5.1. It is contended by the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner that, while entering into service, since Petitioner had no knowledge about his implication in Bhanjanagar P.S. Case No.99 dt.07.04.2015, it cannot be held that Petitioner suppressed the same to get the benefit of appointment. It is accordingly contended that since Petitioner had no knowledge about his implication in the Criminal Case, it cannot be held that he has suppressed the same. 6. When a stand was taken in the counter affidavit that Petitioner had the knowledge about his implication in the aforesaid police case, this Court passed the following order on 01.09.2025. “1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that while submitting the Verification Roll so enclosed vide Annexure-A/3, Petitioner had already been acquitted in Bhanjanagar P.S. Case No.195 of 2015 vide judgment dt.24.07.2017 and in the other case in Bhanjanagar P.S. Case No.99 of 2015, Petitioner was never served with any summon from the competent Court. Accordingly, Petitioner had no knowledge about his implication in Bhanjanagar P.S. Case No.99 of 2015. Because of that, in the verification roll so enclosed vide Annexure-A/3, Petitioner indicated that no criminal proceeding is pending against him. 4. Since no document is available in the record showing that in the aforesaid Bhanjanagar P.S. Case No.99 of 2015, Petitioner was never served with the summon till submission of the Verification Roll under Annexure-A/3, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner is directed to produce the relevant record in support of the aforesaid submission. 5. As requested, list this matter in the week commencing 15th September, 2025.” 7. Basing on the order so passed, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner produced the First Information Report as well as the Final Form submitted in the aforesaid Bhanjanagar P.S. Case No.99 dt.07.04.2015 in Court. 8. Mr. A. Tripathy, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate taking this Court to the Final Form so submitted, contended that the present Petitioner was arrested and released on bail on 04.06.2015. It is accordingly contended that Petitioner when entered into service vide order dt.17.09.2018, Petitioner had the knowledge about his implication in the Criminal case, he having been arrested on 04.06.2015. It is accordingly contended that no illegality or irregularity can be found with the impugned order passed under Anenxure- 6, confirmed vide order under Annexure-8 as Petitioner deliberately suppressed his involvement in the Criminal case. 9. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties considering the submission made, this Court finds that Petitioner was arrested and released on bail on 04.06.2015 in Bhanjanagar P.S. Case No.99 dt.07.04.2015. Hence, it cannot be held that Petitioner had no knowledge about his implication in the said Criminal Proceeding, when he got the benefit of appointment on 17.09.2018. Therefore, this Court finds no illegality or irregularity with the order of discharge so passed under Anenxure-6 and confirmed vide order under Annexure-8 and is not inclined to interfere with the same. 9.1. Since it is contended that Petitioner in the meantime has been acquitted in the Criminal Proceeding, it is open for the Petitioner to move Opp. party No.3 for re-consideration of the order of discharge. 10. The Writ Petition stands dismissed with the aforesaid liberty. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge sangita