Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No. 1588 & 4306 of 2025 Pradipta Kumar Parida & Ors. ..... Petitioners Mr. S.K. Ojha, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Mr. C.K. Pradhan, AGA Mr. S. Swain, Sr. Advocate (Opp. Party No. 3) Mr. G. Mishra, Sr. Advocate (Intervenor) Mr. P. Mohanty, Advocate (Intervenor) Dr. J.K. Lenka, Advocate (Intervenor) CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER 31.03.2026 Order No. 02 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard Mr. S.K. Ojha, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners, Mr. C.K. Pradhan, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate appearing for the State-Opp. Parties, Mr. S. Swain, learned Sr. Counsel appearing for Opp. Party No. 3, Mr. G. Mishra, learned Sr. Counsel, Mr. P. Mohanty, learned counsel and Dr. J.K. Lenka, learned counsel appearing for the Intervenors. 3. While assailing the impugned notification issued by the Commission, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners contended that prior to compliance of the order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 189 of 2023 and batch since the impugned advertisement has been issued to fill up the posts in question, Petitioners will be seriously prejudiced, if the posts are filled up Page 2 of 3. prior to providing appointment in terms of the order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 189 of 2023 & batch. 4. Learned Addl. Govt. Advocate on the other hand contended that order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 189 of 2023 and batch is under challenge before this Court in Writ Appeal No. 1423 of 2025 & batch. It is accordingly contended that since the order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 189 of 2023 & batch has not yet attained finality in the eye of law because of the pendency of the Writ Appeals, Petitioners don’t have any locus standi to challenge the advertisement to fill up the posts in question. It is also contended that if Petitioners will ultimately succeed and the order passed in W.P.(C) No. 189 of 2023 & batch will be confirmed, Petitioners will get the benefit of appointment. 5. Similar submission was also made by the learned Sr. Counsel and other Counsels appearing for the Intervenors-Petitioners. 6. To the submission made by the learned State Counsel, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners contended that if the interest of the Petitioners will be protected, they will have no grievance. 7. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made, this Court while disposing the writ petition, without interfering with the impugned advertisement as well as the corrigendum issued by the Commission under Annexure-2 and 3, observe that Petitioners will be entitled to get the benefit in terms of the order passed in W.P.(C) No. 189 of 2023 & batch, if the said order is upheld and attains finality in the eye of law. 8. With the aforesaid observation, both the writ petitions stand disposed of. Page 3 of 3. Interim order passed earlier stands vacated in both the cases. Photo copy of the order be placed in the connected case record. (BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge Sneha