IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.23279 of 2025 Sima Kumari Sethi …. Petitioner Mr. B.K. Sharma, Sr. Adv. -versus- State of Odisha & Others …. Opposite Parties Mr. C.K. Pradhan, AGA CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER 30.10.2025 01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. Pursuant to order dated 11.09.2025, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate produced the instruction so issued by Opp. Party No.4 vide his letter dated 18.10.2025. The same be kept in record. 4. Basing on the instruction, it is contended that petitioner has been issued with the impugned order, which is not in the nature of a transfer order in true sense. 4.1. It is further contended that for repositioning of the employees in terms of Govt. order dated 20.04.2024, petitioner has been posted to Kushalda PHC under Khunta CHC vide the impugned order dated 05.08.2025 for smooth drawyal of her salary against the vacant post. But petitioner has not been transferred to Kushalda PHC in true sense. p. 2 p. 2 4.2. It is also contended that in terms of the communication issued by the Director-Opp. Party No.2 on 13.08.2025 under Annexure-6, request has been made to the Director vide letter dated 20.08.2025 for repositioning of Pharmacy Officers of Mayurbhanj District. 4.3. Learned Addl. Govt. Advocate accordingly contended that since petitioner has not been transferred in true sense and a request has been made to Opp. Party No.2 to issue the clarification with regard to re-positioning of the Pharmacy officers of Mayurbhanj District, vide letter dated 20.08.2025, impugned order of transfer issued on 05.08.2025 under Annexure-3 needs no interference. 5. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner on the other contended that in view of the stipulation contained in letter dated 16.04.2025 of O.P. No.2 under Annexure-1 and the clarification issued on 13.08.2025 under Annexure-6 the impugned order of transfer so passed by O.P. No.3 under Annexure-3 is not sustainable in the eye of law. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, considering the submissions made and the instruction provided to this Court, this Court finds that petitioner has been put under transfer vide the impugned order p. 3 p. 3 dated 05.08.2025 under Annexure-3. Taking into account the stipulation contained in letter dated 16.04.2025 under Annexure-1 and the clarification issued by Opp. Party No.2 in his letter dtd.13.08.2025, it is the view of this Court that petitioner has been illegally put under transfer vide order dated 05.08.2025 under Annexure-3, even though in the instruction so provided a different plea has been taken. 6.1. This Court accordingly is inclined to quash order dated 05.08.2025 so issued by O.P. No.4 under Annexure-3 so far as it relates to the petitioner. While quashing the same, this Court permits the petitioner to continue in her present place of posting. 7. The Writ Petition accordingly stands disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Basudev