IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) Nos.34500, 34565, 34581 & 34582 of 2025 Kaustubha Sahu …. Petitioner Mr. S.K. Pradhan-2, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. …. Opp. Parties Mr. C.K. Pradhan, AGA CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER 19.02.2026 07. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties. 3. Pursuant to the order dtd.29.01.2026, learned Addl. Government Advocate produced further instruction so provided by the Department. The same be kept in record. 4. All the Writ Petitions have been filed inter alia with similar prayer, which reads as follows:- “In the circumstances the petitioner prays that this Hon'ble Court will graciously be pleased to issue RULE NISI calling upon the opposite parties to show cause as to why the order dated 10.11.2025 contained in ANNEXURE -1 shall not be quashed; AND p. 2 p. 2 service Why the Opp. Parties shall not regularize the petitioner's as Zone Coordinator, Anwesha Concurrent Monitoring and Evaluation Cell with all consequential service and financial benefits; AND If the Opp. Parties fail to show cause or insufficiently show cause the said Rule may please to be made absolute; And/ Or issue any other appropriate writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s) as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper. AND For which act of kindness the petitioner shall as in duty bound ever pray.” 5. It is contended that even though the Petitioners are continuing as Consultant basing on the advertisement issued under Annexure-3, but because of the nature of order issued under Annexure-1 on dtd.10.11.2025, wherein direction was issued to disengage the Petitionerd and similarly situated Consultantd to be made effective on completion of 30 days from the date of issue of the notice, the present Writ Petitions were filed inter alia challenging the same. 5.1. However, it is contended that in view of the interim order passed by this Court on 09.12.2025, all the Petitioners are continuing as on date, but not getting their salary w.e.f. October, 2025. 6. Learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State basing on the instruction so provided earlier and provided in Court today contended that Petitioners p. 3 p. 3 further continuance as Consultant will now be determined in terms of the provisions contained in the office Memorandum dtd.31.07.2025 so issued by the Government in the Finance Department. Placing reliance on Para-3 of the said Memorandum, learned Addl. Government Advocate contended that all the Petitioners will be allowed to continue till 31.03.2026. Their further continuance as Consultants will depend on the requirement of the concerned Department and subject to approval by the Committee under the Chairmanship of the Chief Secretary, with the Development Commissioner –cum- SES, Secretary GA & PG Department, Secretary Finance Department and Secretary of the concerned Department. Para-3 of the Memorandum reads as follows:- “3. Therefore, it is now decided that every State Government Department shall thoroughly assess their need of consultants (engaged in whatever name and form, in the Department as well as in subordinate entities/ organizations of the Department) and propose to Finance Department the optimum number of consultants required to be engaged w.e.f. 01.04.2026. Finance Department will then place the matter before a committee (under chairpersonshop of undersigned, with Development Commissioner-cum-ACS, Secretary of GA & PG Department, Secretary of Finance Department and Secretary of the Department concerned as members) for deciding the optimum number of consultants to be engaged in the Department and its subordinate entities / organizations w.e.f. from 01.04.2026. Without prior approval of the above-said Committee, remuneration shall not be paid to any consultantt (engaged in whatever name and form) after 01.04.2026”. p. 4 p. 4 6.1. It is contended that since Petitioners will now be permitted to continue till 31.03.2026 and their further continuance will be subject to the requirement to be furnished by the concerned Department and approval of the Committee, challenge made in the Writ Petition has become infructuous. 7. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties, considering the submissions made and the stipulation contained in Office Memorandum dtd.31.07.2025, this Court while disposing the Writ Petition directs the Opposite Parties to allow the Petitioners to continue till 31.03.2026 with payment of their remuneration as due and admissible. However, it is observed that their further continuance will be subject to the stipulation contained in Para-3 of the Memorandum. 8. Accordingly, all the Writ Petitions stand disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. 9. Photocopy of the order be placed in other connected Writ Petitions. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Subrat