Page 1 of 4. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 28107 of 2024 Motiram Tripathy ..... Petitioner Mr. P.K. Mohapatra, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Mr. S.K. Jee, AGA CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER 08.04.2025 Order No. 05. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Parties. 3. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia challenging order dated 29.06.2024 so passed by O.P. No.1 under Annexure-6. Vide the said order, claim of the petitioner to get the benefit of promotion to the post of Jr. S.E.S. w.e.f. 1988 with all service benefits has been rejected. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that similar issue was before the Tribunal in O.A. No.3885(C) of 2012 and batch. The Tribunal vide order dated 16.09.2016 while disposing the said batch of Original Applications, not only held the applicant therein to get the benefit of promotion to Jr. S.E.S. notionally against year wise vacancy but also held that similarly placed persons be also promoted to the post of Jr. S.E.S. against year wise vacancy. 4.1. It is contended that the order passed by the Tribunal on 16.09.2016 when was challenged by the State before this Court in W.P.(C) No.28133 of 2021 along with W.P.(C) No.28136 of Page 2 of 4. 2021 and batch, all those writ petitions were dismissed vide order dated 28.10.2021. 4.2. It is further contended that the State challenging the order passed in W.P.(C) No.28133 of 2021 and batch, approached the Hon’ble Apex Court by filing SLP (Civil) Diary No.16586 of 2025. Hon’ble Apex Court vide order dated 25.10.2024 dismissed the SLP by confirming the order passed by the Tribunal so confirmed by this Court. 4.3. It is also contended that after dismissal of the SLP, O.P. No.1 vide letter dated 28.11.2024 has directed for implementation of the order passed by the Tribunal so confirmed by this Court on 28.10.2021. Copy of the order passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court and copy of letter dated 28.11.2024 so produced by the learned counsel for the Petitioner. 4.4. It is further contended that even though the Tribunal vide order dated 16.09.2016 held similarly situated persons entitled to get the benefit on the face of such order passed by the Tribunal which has been confirmed by this Court as well as by the Hon’ble Apex Court, the ground on which claim of the petitioner has been rejected vide the impugned order dated 29.06.2024 under Annexure-6 is not sustainable in the eye of law. 4.5. It is also contended that since the Tribunal held all similarly situated persons entitled to get the benefit, there is no delay in making the approach by the petitioner. Since on the face of such order, the benefit was not extended in favour of the petitioner in spite of repeated approach, petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.8279 of 2022. This Court vide order dated 25.08.2022 accordingly directed O.P. No.1 for consideration of Page 3 of 4. the petitioner’s claim. But without proper appreciation the order passed by the Tribunal dated 16.09.2016 so confirmed by this Court as well as by the Hon’ble Apex Court, claim of the petitioner was rejected vide the impugned order dated 29.06.2024 under Annexure-6. It is accordingly contended that the impugned order is not sustainable in the eye of law. 5. Even though notice of the Writ Petition has been issued and counter affidavit has already been filed, but on being confronted with the order of the Tribunal so passed vide order dated 16.09.2016, further confirmed by this Court as well as by the Apex Court, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate contended that the matter be remitted to O.P. No. 1 to take a fresh decision taking into account the order passed under Annexure-7 and further confirmed by this Court as well as by the Hon’ble Apex Court. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the submissions made, this Court finds that the Tribunal while deciding similar issue in O.A. No.3885(C) of 2012 and batch, vide order dated 16.09.2016, held the applicants in those batch of Original Applications not only entitled to get the benefit of promotion to the post of Jr. S.E.S. against year wise vacancy, but also held similarly situated persons eligible and entitled to get the said benefit. As found, order passed by the Tribunal was confirmed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.28133 of 2021 vide order dated 28.10.2021. Not only that SLP filed by the State against the order passed in W.P.(C) No.28133 of 2021 was also dismissed vide order dated 25.10.2024 in SLP(Civil) Diary No.16586 of 2024. Page 4 of 4. 6.1. In view of the nature of order passed in O.A. No.3885(c)/2012 & batch, so confirmed by this Court vide order dt.28.10.2021 and further confirmed by the Hon’ble Apex Court, it is the view of this Court that the ground on which claim of the petitioner has been rejected vide the impugned order dated 29.06.2024 is not sustainable in the eye of law. Therefore, this Court is inclined to quash the said order. While quashing the same, this Court remits the matter to O.P. No.1 to take a fresh decision on the claim of the petitioner in the light of the order passed by the Tribunal O.A. No.3885(c)/2012 & batch, further confirmed by this Court as well as by the Hon’ble Apex Court. Such a fresh decision be taken within a period of 3 (three) months from the date of receipt of this order with due communication to the petitioner. 7. The Writ Petition accordingly stands disposed of. (BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge Madhusmita Designation: Junior Stenographer