IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C ) No.34745 of 2023 Annapurna Das & Others …. Petitioners Mr. Atul Tripathy, Adv. -versus- State of Odisha & Others …. Opposite Parties Mr. C.K. Pradhan, AGA COROM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No ORDER 21.04.2026 15. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode. 2. Pursuant to order dt.09.04.2026, learned Addl.Govt. Advocate produced the instruction so provided by the Director, Regional Spinal Injury Centre vide letter dt.20.04.2026 in Court with service of copy on the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner. The same be kept on record. 3. Basing on the instruction, it is fairly contended that benefit of regularisation issued in favour of the Petitioners vide order dt.03.10.2013 has not yet been withdrawn/cancelled awaiting instruction from the higher authorities. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 5. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer: On the facts and in the circumstances stated above, your petitioners, therefore, pray that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to; (i) quash the impugned order dt.24.11.2022 in Annexure-9 by holding the same as bad and illegal p. 2 p. 2 and contrary to Annexure-5,6 and 7 series and violative of Art-14 and 16,19,21 and 300 A of the Constitution of India, and thereby (ii) direct the Opp. Parties to allow the Petitioners their entitled scale of pay of Rs.9,300-34,800/-+GP Rs.4200/- based on Annexure-3 to 6 with effect from 03.10.2016, i.e., the date on which they have completed 3 years of regular service as Staff Nurses ad in the same manner as has been allowed to other Staff Nurses n Annexure-7 series and (iii) pass such other order(s) as deemed fit and proper n the Bonafide interest of justice; And for which act of your kindness, the petitioners shall as in duty bound, ever pray. 6. It is contended that Petitioners on being appointed as Contractual Staff Nurse in Regional Spinal Injury Centre, S.C.B Medical College & Hospital, Cuttack, during the period 2001-2003. Petitioners joined in their services on 08.06.2001,06.05.2003,08.06.2001,08.06.2001,06.05.2003, 1.3.2002 and 08.09.2008 respectively. It is further contended that taking into account the continuance of the Petitioners as Contractual Staff Nurse, vide Office Order dt.03.10.2013 under Annexure-3, their services were regularised in the Scale of Pay of Rs.5,200-20,200/- with Grade Pay of Rs.2800/-. However, on the face of such regularisation with the Scale of Pay so indicated in the Office order dt.03.10.2013, Petitioners when were not extended with the Scale of Pay as applicable under ORSP Rules, 2016, nor the benefit of resolution issued by the Finance Department on 26.06.2013 under Annexure-5, they raised a claim to get the benefit of the said resolution. p. 3 p. 3 6.1. As the claim of the Petitioners was not considered, they approached this Court by filing W.P.(C ) No.23483 of 2020. This Court vide order dt.29.09.2020 under Annexure-8, though directed for consideration of their claim, but the same was rejected vide the impugned order dt.24.11.2022 under Annexure-9. 6.2. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners contended that since Petitioners were regularised vide Office Order dt.03.10.2013 with Grade Pay of Rs.2800/-, in view of the resolution issued under Annexure-5, on completion of 3 (three) years of service as a regular employee, they become entitled to get the Grade Pay of Rs.4200/-, in the scale of pay of Rs.7,300-34,800/-. But the same was never released and the order passed by this Court to consider such grievance of the Petitioners, was rejected vide the impugned order dt.24.11.2022 under Annexure-9. 6.3. It is contended that since there is no dispute that Petitioners are regular employees, in view of the stipulation contained in Resolution dt.26.06.2013, they are eligible and entitled to get the benefit of Grade Pay of Rs.4200/-in the Scale of Pay of Rs.9300-34800/- which has been illegally rejected vide the impugned order. It is accordingly contended that the impugned order requires interference of this Court. 7. Counter affidavit has been filed by Opp. Party Nos.1 & 2 justifying the impugned order. Basing on the stand taken in the counter affidavit, it is contended that since Petitioners’ services have been regularised inadvertently, Petitioners are not eligible and entitled to get the benefit of Grade Pay with the scale of pay so reflected in resolution dt.26.06.2013 under Annexure-5 on completion of 3(three) years of service in the regular Cadre. It is accordingly p. 4 p. 4 contended that no illegality or irregularity can be found with the impugned rejection. 8. Considering the stand taken in the counter affidavit, this Court passed the following order on 09.04.2026. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the State prays for some time to obtain instruction as to whether order of regularisation issued in favour of the Petitioners vide order dated 03.10.2013 under Annexure-3 was withdrawn/cancelled at any point of time. 4. On the request made by Mr. C.K. Pradhan, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate, list this matter on 21.04.2026. 5. No further time will be allowed for the aforesaid purpose. 8.1. Pursuant to such order, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate produced the instruction so provided by the Director, Regional Spinal Injury Centre. This Court after going through the instruction finds that order of regularisation issued in favour of the Petitioners on 03.10.2013 under Annexure-3, has neither been cancelled nor withdrawn, as on date. 9. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties sand considering the submission made, this Court finds that Petitioners while continuing as Contractual Staff Nurses, vide Office Order dt.03.10.2013 under Anenxure-3, they were regularised in the Scale of Pay of Rs.5,200-20,200/-, with Grade Pay of Rs.2800/-. As found from the resolution issued by the Finance Department on 26.06.2013, such Staff Nurses on completion of 3(three) years of service in the regular cadre, p. 5 p. 5 became entitled to get the Grade Pay of Rs.4,200/- with the scale of pay of Rs.9300-34,800/- 9.1. However, on the face of such Resolution, when the benefit of Scale of Pay of Rs.9,300-34,800/- with Grade Pay of Rs.4200/- was not extended in favour of the Petitioners, they made a grievance and approached this Court in W.P.(C ) No.23483 of 2020. This Court vide order dt.29.09.2020 when directed for consideration of their claim, their claim was rejected vide the impugned order dt.24.11.2022 under Annexure-9 on the ground that the order of regularisation in favour of the Petitioners has been inadvertently issued by the authority concerned. 9.2. Since from the instruction so provided to the Court today, it is fairly admitted that order of regularisation has not yet been cancelled nor withdrawn, it is the view of this Court that the ground on which Petitioners’ claim has been rejected vide the impugned order is not legal and justified. 9.3.Since Petitioners, which is not disputed, are continuing as regular employees in terms of order dt.03.10.2013, it is the view of this Court that they are also entitled to get the benefit of Scale of Pay of Rs.9,300-34,800/- with Grade Pay of Rs.4200/-, so reflected in the resolution dt.26.06.2013 under Annexure-5 9.4. Therefore, in view of the aforesaid analysis, this Court while quashing the impugned order dt.24.11.2022, under Annexure-9, direct Opp. Party No.1 to extend the benefit of Scale of Pay of Rs.9,300-34,800/- with Grade Pay of Rs.4200/- in favour of the Petitioners from the date of their entitlement so provided in Resolution dt.26.06.2013 under Annexure-5 read with clarification issued vide letter dt.17.05.2014 under Annexure-6 and release the differential entitlements as due and admissible. This Court directs Opp. Party No.1 to complete the entire exercise p. 6 p. 6 within a period of 3(three) months from the date of receipt of this order. 10. The Writ Petition accordingly stands disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge sangita