Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Orissa · body

2025 DAILYLAW 5310 (ORI)

PRATYUSH KUMAR BHATTA v. STATE OF ODISHA

WP(C)/35469/2025 · 2026-02-18

Biraja Prasanna Satapathy

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page 1 of 2. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No. 35469 of 2025 Pratyush Kumar Bhatta ..... Petitioner Mr. P.K. Rath, Sr. Advocate along with Mr. A. Behera, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Mr. S.P. Das, ASC CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER 18.02.2026 Order No. 02 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard Mr. P.K. Rath, learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the Petitioner along with Mr. A. Behera, learned counsel and Mr. S.P. Das, learned Addl. Standing Counsel appearing for the Opp. Parties. 3. The present writ petition has been filed inter alia challenging order dtd.08.12.2025 so issued under Annexure-1. Vide the said order Petitioner has been put under transfer from the office of ZI BR, BBSR and additional Charge of ZI, SAP, BBSR to 5th IR BN, Boudh. 4. It is the main contention of the learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the Petitioner that Petitioner is at the fag-end of his career and he is due to retire on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.05.2026. It is accordingly contended that since Petitioner is at the fag end of his career, in view of the resolution issued by the Govt. under Annexure- 5, he should not have been put under transfer. Accordingly, it is Page 2 of 2. contended that the impugned order of transfer needs interference of this Court. It is further contended that taking into account the interim order passed by this Court, Petitioner is continuing at Bhubaneswar as usual. 5. Learned Addl. Standing Counsel on the other hand made his submission basing on the stand taken in the counter affidavit. It is contended that since Petitioner has been put under transfer on public interest and he has already rendered service at Bhubaneswar for sufficient time after his earlier posting and transfer, no interference is called for. 6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submission made and the fact that Petitioner is going to be retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.05.2026 and he is continuing by virtue of the interim order passed by this Court on 11.12.2025, this Court while disposing the writ petition, directs Opp. Parties to allow the Petitioner to continue in his present place of posting till he attained the age of superannuation. 7. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. (BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge Sneha