IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.A. No.2426 OF 2023 State of Odisha and others …. Appellants Mr. Siba Narayan Biswal, Additional Standing Counsel -versus- Chitta Ranjan Biswal & others …. Respondents Mr. Satyajit Behera, Advocate CORAM: JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA ORDER Order No. 14.05.2026 I.A. No.6790 of 2023 05. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. This is an application to dispense with filing of certified copy of order dated 2nd May, 2023 passed in WPC(OAC) No.4573 of 2016, which is impugned herein. 2.1. Since the disposed of case record of WPC(OAC) No.4573 of 2016 is attached to the writ appeal, filing of certified copy of the impugned order under Annexure-1 is dispensed with for the time being. 3. I.A. is disposed of. (K.R. Mohapatra) Judge (S.K. Mishra) Judge PTO I.A. No.6791 of 2023 06. 1. This is an application for condonation of delay of 354 days in filing the writ appeal. 2. Mr. Satyajit Behera, learned Counsel for the Respondents submits that he has no objection to the condonation of delay. It is submitted that the issue involved in this appeal has already been adjudicated by a coordinate Bench and taking into consideration the same, this Court, vide order dated 10.04.2026, directed the learned State Counsel to take instruction in the matter. 3. Hence, learned Counsel for both the parties pray for condoning the delay in filing the writ appeal and to take up the writ appeal on merits. 4. In view of such submissions, the delay of 354 days in filing the writ appeal is condoned. 5. Accordingly, the I.A. stands disposed of. (K.R. Mohapatra) Judge (S.K. Mishra) Judge WA NO.2426 of 2023 07. 1. Although the matter is listed under the heading “For Orders”, but on the request of learned Counsel for the parties, the writ appeal is taken up for final disposal. Page 3 of 6 2. This writ appeal has been filed assailing the order dated 02.05.2023 passed by learned Single Judge, in WPC (OAC) No.4573 of 2016, whereby the Opposite Parties directed to absorb the respondents in the regular establishment and/or in the work changed establishment within a period of three months from the date of receipt copy of the order. 3. It is submitted by Mr. Biswal, learned Additional Standing Counsel that the respondents moved the Odisha Administrative Tribunal in OA No.4573 of 2016 with a prayer to regularize their services from the date of initial appointment and grant to extend all consequential service as well as financial benefit in their favour. 4. On abolition of the Odisha Administrative Tribunal, the OA was transferred to this Court and was registered as WPC (OAC) No.4573 of 2016. The said writ petition was heard along with WPC(OAC) No. 1568 of 2018 filed by Sk. Saifur Raheman and others for the selfsame relief. Since in both the writ petitions, the Petitioners claimed similar relief on similar set of facts, those were taken up together and disposed of by a common order. 5. The State of Odisha, being aggrieved, filed WA No.2427 of 2023 against the order passed in WPC(OAC) No.1568 of 2018 and the present writ appeal in respect of WPC (OAC) No.4573 of 2016. Initially, both the writ appeals were dismissed on the ground of delay. Hence, the State of Odisha moved the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP(C) No.20060 of 2024 assailing the said order dated 20th November, 2023 passed by this Court in respect of the present appeal. The SLP was disposed of on 20th August, 2025 by setting aside the order passed in the present writ appeal and remitting the matter to this Court to consider the petition for condonation of delay afresh on its own merit. Accordingly, the writ appeal is taken up today. 6. Delay in filing the writ appeal has already been condoned and the matter is taken up on merit. This writ appeal arises out of a common order passed in WPC(OAC) No.1568 of 2018 and WPC (OAC) No.4573 of 2016. This writ appeal is confined to WPC (OAC) No.4573 of 2016. 7. Writ Appeal No.2427 of 2023 filed against the said common order in respect of WPC(OAC) No.1568 of 2018 has already been disposed of vide order dated 02.02.2026. The said order is reproduced hereunder: “W.A. No. 2427 of 2023 1. This intra-court appeal is directed against the judgment passed in the connected W.P.(C) (OAC) No. 1568 of 2018, whereby the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition and directed the authorities to extend pensionary benefits to the respondent by treating him as regularised prior to superannuation. 2. The respondent was initially engaged as an NMR employee under the Department and was subsequently brought over to the work-charged establishment. He continued in such capacity for a long and uninterrupted period and was allowed to retire on attaining the age of' superannuation. His claim for pension was declined on the ground that no formal order of regularisation had been issued in his favour prior to retirement and, that his work-charged service could not be counted for pension in the absence of such regularisation. 3. It is not in dispute that the respondent rendered continuous service under the Department and that there is no allegation of misconduct or break in service. The denial of pension is founded solely on the absence of a formal order of absorption in the regular establishment before superannuation. 4. The issue is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in State of Odisha & Ors vs. Basanti Das, ordered in W.A. No. l598 of 2024. In the absence of any distinguishing feature, the present appeal stands covered by the aforesaid judgment. 5. The appellants shall treat the respondent as notionally regularised at least one day prior to his superannuation, by creating a supernumerary post if necessary, and extend pensionary and other admissible retirement benefits within two months from the date of communication of this judgment. 6. In consequence, all the pending I.As. are also disposed of. Web copy of the order to be acted upon by all concerned.” 8. The matter was taken up on 10.04.2026, when Mr. Behera, learned Counsel for the Respondents submitted that the issue involved in WA No.2427 of 2023, disposed of on 2nd February, 2026, is similar to the present writ appeal. A copy of the said order was also produced before this Court, which was taken on record. Accordingly, learned State Counsel was directed to take instruction in the matter. 9. Today, Mr. Biswal, learned Additional Standing Counsel, on verification of the record and obtaining instruction submits that issue involved in both the writ appeals, i.e., WA No.2427 of 2023 and present one, i.e., WA No.2426 of 2023 is similar. 10. Hence, we do not want to take a different view in this writ appeal. As such, the Writ appeal is disposed of in terms of the order dated 2nd February, 2026 passed in W.A. No..2427 of 2023. 11. It is observed that the Appellants shall treat the Respondents as notionally regularized at least one day prior to his superannuation by creating a supernumerary post, if necessary, and extend pensionary and others admissible retirement benefits within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 12. Accordingly, the writ appeal is disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. Pending interim application, if any, also stands disposed of accordingly. (K.R. Mohapatra) Judge (S.K. Mishra) Judge Mona