IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.25076 of 2025 Dukhabandhu Naik …. Petitioner Mr. K.C. Sahu, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and Others …. Opp. Parties Mr. S. Das, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No ORDER 16.10.2025 02. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. The Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition with the following prayer: - “It is therefore prayed that the Hon'ble Court be graciously pleased to pass following relief(s):- (i) The Hon'ble Court be pleased to admit & allow this writ petition. (ii) That the Hon'ble Court be graciously pleased with further directing the 0pp. parties for regular absorption of the service of the petitioner in the existing sanctioned vacant Group-D post of Peon or in any of the available regular Group-D vacant post under the administrative control of 0pp. party no. 4 & 6 keeping in view of the similar such decisions or regularization as has been made in case of other similar situated employees like the petitioner under Annexure-9, 10, 11 & 12 so also keeping in view of the recent p. 2 p. 2 judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in the case of "Jagoo — Vs. Union of India", "Shripal & another -Vs. Nagar Nigam, GaziaBad" and "Dharam Singh & Others -Vs. State of U.P & others" mentioned in Para-14 of the writ .petition by further allowing the petitioner to continue in his post as usual till such regularization for the interest of justice. (iii) The Hon'ble court be pleased to pass any other order(s)/direction(s) as deems fit & proper for the bonafide interest of justice.” 4. It is contended that claim made by the petitioner is covered by an order passed by this Court in its judgment dated 17.09.2025 in W.P.(C) No.38277 of 2023. 5. Learned Addl. Standing Counsel on the other hand contended that if as contended, claim of the petitioner is covered by the aforesaid order, let the petitioner move O.P. No.1 for consideration of the claim as made in the Writ Petition. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the submissions made, this Court while disposing the Writ Petition, permits the petitioner to move O.P. No.1 to get the benefit as prayed for in the Writ Petition. It is observed that if any such application will be moved before O.P. No.1 within a period of 3 (three) weeks hence, O.P. No.1 shall take a lawful decision on the same within a period of 3 (three) months from the date of receipt of such application. It is however observed that relevancy and effect of order dated 17.09.2025 so passed in W.P.(C) No.38277 of p. 3 p. 3 2023 be taken into consideration, if it is applicable to the case of the petitioner. 7. The Writ Petition stands disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Basudev