IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.35931 of 2022 Manoj Kumar Pandey …. Petitioner None -versus- Odisha State Co-operative Marketing Federation Ltd., BBSR & Ors. …. Opposite Parties Mr. S.P. Das, ASC Mr. D.K. Mohanty, Adv. for O.P.2 CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER 11.03.2026 02. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties. 3. None appeared for the Petitioner so engaged by the Petitioner. However, Mr. T.K. Biswal, learned counsel appearing for the self-same Petitioner in the connected W.P.(C) No.24629 of 2025, contended that in view of the nature of interim order passed by the State Cooperative Tribunal in Misc. Case No.66 of 2021 arising out of S.D. Case No.46 of 2021, the proceeding in question could not have been disposed of with passing of the final order, vide the impugned order dtd.19.12.2022 under Annexure-9. 4. It is accordingly contended that since on the face of the interim order passed by the Tribunal, the proceeding was disposed of with passing of the impugned order, the same is not sustainable in the eye of law. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the Opposite Party No.2 on the other hand contended that the Tribunal vide order dtd.17.12.2021, never passed any order restraining the OP-federation from passing the final order in the disciplinary proceeding. Instead vide order dtd.17.12.2021, the Tribunal only stayed the order of suspension. 5.1. It is accordingly contended that since there was no interim order restraining the Federation from disposing the proceeding during pendency of the dispute no illegality or irregularity can be found with the impugned order so passed under Annexure-9. It is also contended that the impugned order is an appealable one. 6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made, this Court finds that vide order dtd.17.12.2021 in Misc. Case No.66 of 2021 arising out of S.D. Case No.46 of 2021, the Tribunal only stayed the order of suspension so passed against the Petitioner on 10.08.2017. This Court after going through the said order, finds that there is no restrain order passed, restraining the Federation from proceeding with the proceeding, with passing of the final order so passed on 19.12.2022 under Annexure-9. 6.1. Therefore, this Court finds no illegality or irregularity with the impugned order dtd.19.12.2022 and is not inclined to interfere with the same. 6.2. Petitioner is permitted to move the appellate authority against the impugned order, if so advised. However, considering the fact that the Writ Petition was entertained, with passing of an interim order on 02.01.2023, it is observed that if any such appeal will be moved within a period of three (3) weeks hence, the appellate authority shall entertain the appeal and decide the issue on merit without insisting on any delay. 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Subrat