Page 1 of 4. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.31768 of 2024 Basanta Kumar Bal ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Laxmikanta Mohanty -versus- State of Odisha and others ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv. – Smt. S. Nayak, ASC CORAM: MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 05.05.2026 Order No. 03. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners as well as learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State-Opposite Parties. Perused the writ petition as well as documents annexed thereto. 3. By filing the present writ application, the Petitioner has prayed for the following relief:- “It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue notice to the opp. parties calling upon them to file show cause as to why: (i) the order of rejection dated 18.10.2024 issued by the opp. party no. 1 under Annexure -11 shall not be quashed/set aside, taking into consideration the judgment passed by this Hon'ble Court in similar matter dated 19.06.2018 and 05.05.2017 under Annexure 4 and 5 and a direction shall not be issued to count the entire period of service of the petitioner from the date of appointment as Resource Teacher dated 19.09.1991 towards service seniority, pay protection and grant of other service benefits Page 2 of 4. including revision of pay and RACP benefits and to count the entire period of service from 19.09.1991 to 31.03.2023 towards pension and pensionary benefits . (ii) And after hearing the parties be pleased to direct the opp. parties to count the period of service of the petitioner from 19.09.2991 to 30.11.1995 for all purpose including pay protection, service seniority and other service benefits including differential pay revision and RACP benefit w.e.f 1.1.2013 along with 3rd MACP w.e.f. 19.9.2021; (iii) The opp. parties be further directed to count the entire period of service of the petitioner from 19.9.1991 to 31.3.2023 for the purpose of pension and pensionary benefits and release all arrears in his favour within a date to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court. And pass such other order/orders granting complete relief to the petitioner. And for this act of kindness the petitioner shall as in duty bound ever pray.” 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that being aggrieved by the impugned rejection order dated 28.10.2024 at Annexure-11 passed by the Opposite Party No.1, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ application. He further contended that earlier the Petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.4661 of 2024 which was disposed of by order dated 05.03.2024 thereby granting liberty to the Petitioner to approach the Opposite Party No.1 by filing a detailed representation and the Opposite Party No.1 was directed to consider the same within a period of three months. He further submitted that pursuant to the aforesaid order the Petitioner approached the Opposite Party No.1. The Opposite Party No.1 after considering the grievance of the Petitioner by virtue of order dated 28.10.2024 at Annexure-11 has been pleased to reject the prayer of the Petitioner on the principal ground that Page 3 of 4. the Petitioner appointed was schematic therefore, he cannot claim regularization as a matter of right. He further submitted that an identical question before this Court for adjudication at Annexure-4 in W.P.(C) No.22972 of 2017 along with a batch of similar other writ applications. A Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 19.06.2018 at Annexure-4 to the writ application have decided the issue and by taking into consideration the long period of service of the Petitioner and considering the fact that they were never retrench and appointment order was issued to dismiss the State writ application challenging order dated 28.09.2015 passed by the learned Odisha Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack in O.A. No.3254 of 2011 and a batch of similar other writ application. 5. This Court in Gitarani Ghadei vs. State of Orissa and others in W.P.(C) No.14693 of 2024 while adjudicating the identical matter had also taken a similar view. 6. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contended that the Opposite Parties have not committed any illegality in rejecting the claim of the Petitioner by virtue of his reasoned and speaking order dated 28.10.2024 at Annexure-11. While supporting the impugned rejection order learned counsel for the State contended that the appointment of the Petitioner was against the schematic post. Therefore, after abolition of the scheme the Petitioner has no right to claim any benefit either to continue in service or other consequential service benefits. Drawing attention of this Court to the impugned rejection order, learned counsel for the State stated before this Court that the Opposite Party No.1 has taken into consideration the grounds taken by the Petitioner in his representation and by virtue of a speaking and reasoned order, the Page 4 of 4. claim of the Petitioner has been rejected. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the State contended that the impugned rejection order at Annexure-16 does not call for any interference by this Court, at this stage. As such, it was prayed that the writ petition being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed. 7. Having heard the learned counsels for both sides, on a careful examination of the submissions made by both sides, further on a careful examination of the factual background as well as the documents annexed to the writ application, this Court is of the view that the case of the Petitioner is squarely covered by the ratio laid down in WPC(OAC) No.696 of 2018 and a batch of similar other matters which were disposed of vide order dated 22.04.2022. As such, this Court has no hesitation to conclude that the case of the Petitioner is to be governed by order dated 22.04.2022, which has been passed in the case of similarly placed persons and which has also been upheld not only by the Division Bench of this Court but also by the Hon’ble Supreme Court by dismissing the SLP bearing SLP(C) Diary No.20666 of 2024 vide order dated 03.09.2024. Accordingly, the present writ application is being disposed of in terms of the order dated 22.04.2022 passed in WPC(OAC) No.696 of 2018 and the impugned order dated 28.10.2024 at Annexure-11 is hereby quashed. 8. Accordingly, The Writ Petition stands disposed of. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules. ( A.K. Mohapatra) Judge Sisir Designation: PERSONAL ASSISTANT