IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK (In these matters of applications under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India) W.P.(C) No.8167 of 2025 Santosh Kumar Panigrahi and others …. Petitioners -versus- State of Odisha and others …. Opposite Parties W.P.(C) No.10019 of 2025 Mamata Parida and others …. Petitioners -versus- State of Odisha and others …. Opposite Parties W.P.(C) No.11251 of 2025 Sabita Grahacharya and others …. Petitioners -versus- State of Odisha and others …. Opposite Parties W.P.(C) No.32488 of 2025 Rashmi Kanta Srichandan and others …. Petitioners -versus- State of Odisha and others …. Opposite Parties Appeared in all the Writ Petitions:- For all the Petitioners : Mr. S.P. Jena, Adv. For all the Opposite Parties : Mr. Gyanalok Mohanty, SC (for the State-Opp. Parties) CORAM: JUSTICE A.C. BEHERA JUDGMENT Date of hearing : 12.02.2026 / date of judgment : 19.02.2026 A.C. Behera, J. Since, the prayers in all these four writ petitions filed by the Petitioners and the Opposite Parties thereof are similar, then, all these four writ petitions are taken up together analogously for their final disposal through this common Judgment. 2. These writ petitions have been filed by the Petitioners praying for directing the Opposite Parties to appoint them (Petitioners) as Sikhya Sahayaks taking into account 5044 numbers of backlog vacancies for Sikhya Sahayaks applying the principles of law decided by this Court in W.A. No.701 of 2019 between Babita Satpathy and others Vrs. State of Odisha and others along with batch of writ petitions for filling up of the vacancies of the Sikhya Sahayaks and to pass such order/orders and direction/directions as the Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice and equity. 3. The factual backgrounds of these writ petitions, which prompted the Petitioners for filing of the same are that, the Petitioners are trained graduates and they have passed OTET examination and as such, they (Petitioners) have possessed required academic and training qualification to be engaged as Sikhya Sahayaks as per the guidelines of the Government in consonance with provisions of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009. As such, they (Petitioners) have possessed the required qualifications as prescribed by the National Council for Teacher Education (NCT) to get appointments as teachers for imparting education to the students of Class-I to Class-VIII. As per the resolution of the Government, the Government of Odisha School and Mass Education Department made an advertisement on dated 26.12.2016 inviting the applications from the applicants to apply for Sikhya Sahayaks against the notified huge vacancies. As, the Petitioners had possessed required qualifications, they submitted their applications for the same in due time. But, their applications were rejected on the ground of their over age discriminating them (Petitioners) debarring them from getting appointment as Sikhya Sahayaks in spite of keeping 5044 numbers of backlog vacancies. When, several numbers of over age OTET passed graduates were allowed to be considered to get appointments as Sikhya Sahayaks against the vacancies in view of the judgment dated 23.12.2020 passed in W.A. No.701 of 2019 and batch of the writ appeals, then, the Petitioners approached this Court by filing these writ petitions praying for directing the O.Ps to appoint them as Sikhya Sahayaks taking into account 5044 numbers of backlog vacancies for Sikhya Sahayaks applying the principles of law decided by this Court in the above judgment dated 23.12.2020 passed in W.A. No.701 of 2019 between Babita Satpathy and others Vrs. State of Odisha and others in batch of writ appeals in respect of the same. 4. I have already heard from the learned counsel for the Petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for the State. 5. During the course of hearing of these writ petitions, the learned counsel for the Petitioners submitted the judgments dated 19.12.2025 passed in batch of writ petitions in W.P.(C) No.32208 of 2023 between Dhaneswar Das and others Vrs. State of Odisha and others and the judgment dated 20.01.2026 passed in W.P.(C) No.4966 of 2025 between Ratnakar Nayak Vrs. State of Odisha and others contending for disposing of these present writ petitions passing similar judgments like the judgments passed in above disposed of writ petitions, as the Petitioners are similarly placed with the Petitioners in the above disposed of writ petitions. 6. It appears from the judgments dated 19.12.2025 passed in W.P.(C) No.32208 of 2023 along with batch of writ petitions and judgment dated 20.01.2026 passed in W.P.(C) No.4966 of 2025, the Petitioners of these present writ petitions are similarly placed with the Petitioners of the above disposed of writ petitions. Because, the applications of the Petitioners in the above disposed of writ petitions for Sikhya Sahayaks were rejected by the O.Ps on the ground of their over age like the Petitioners in these present writ petitions and taking their grievances into account, the judgments were passed in W.A. No.701 of 2019, in W.P.(C) No.32208 of 2023 and in W.P.(C) No.4966 of 2025 directing the Opposite Parties for the engagement of the Petitioners thereof as Sikhya Sahayaks or in any other equivalent posts against the unfilled vacancies of 2014 and to complete the entire exercise about the same within a period of three months from the date of the said judgments. 7. When, the Petitioners in these writ petitions are similarly placed with the Petitioners in the aforesaid disposed of writ petitions, then, as per law, the judgments in these writ petitions are required to be passed alike with the judgments of the aforesaid disposed of writ petitions. Because, it is the settled propositions of law that, like cases are to be decided alike and similarly placed applicants/Petitioners are entitled to get equal treatment from the Court without any discrimination. 8. On this aspect, the propositions of law has already been clarified in the ratio of the following decisions:- (i) In a case between Ardhendu Sekhar Rath and another Vrs. State of Odisha & Others reported in 2019 (2) OJR 491 that, Article 14 of the Constitution of India, 1950 prescribes equality before law, law should be deal alike with all in one class; that there shall be equality of treatment under equal circumstances, which means “that equals should not be treated unlike and unlikes should not be treated alike, likes should be treated as alike”. Page 7 of 8 (ii) In a case between Dkshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam and others Vrs. Bachan Singh reported in AIR 2009 (SC) 2745 that, As per Article 14 of the Constitution of India, 1950 is that, all persons similarly placed shall be treated alike, both in privileges conferred and liabilities imposed. Equal laws would have to be applied to all in the same situation without any discrimination. 9. So, by applying the principles of law enunciated in the ratio of the aforesaid decisions, it is held that, the Petitioners in these present writ petitions being equal to the Petitioners with the above disposed of writ petitions, they (Petitioners) are entitled to get equal treatment/judgment like them and the Court cannot discriminate between similarly situated persons, because, as per law, all persons similarly situated should be treated similarly. Therefore, there is no other alternative for this Court, but, to dispose of these present writ petitions passing similar judgments/orders, those were passed in the aforesaid earlier writ petitions between Dhaneswar Das and others Vrs. State of Odisha and others in batch of writ petitions and Ratnakar Nayak Vrs. State of Odisha and others referred to (supra), as the Petitioners in these present writ petitions are similarly situated like the Petitioners in the aforesaid disposed of writ petitions. 10. So, for the reasons assigned above, these present writ petitions filed by the Petitioners are to be disposed of in the same lines of W.P.(C) No.32208 of 2023 and W.P.(C) No.4966 of 2025 respectively. 11. Therefore, all these writ petitions filed by the Petitioners are allowed giving liberty to all the Petitioners in these present writ petitions to submit their representations annexing relevant documents relating to their qualifications before the O.P. No.1 for their engagements as Sikhya Sahayaks or any other equivalent posts with the certified copy of this judgment to consider and dispose of their representations similarly to the Applicants/Petitioners in W.P.(C) No.32208 of 2023 and W.P.(C) No.4966 of 2025 respectively. 12. As such, all these four writ petitions are disposed of finally. (A.C. Behera), Judge Orissa High Court, Cuttack 19th of February, 2026/ Binayak Sahoo// Junior Stenographer