IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) Nos.21401 of 2026, W.P.(C) Nos.12341 & 15369 of 2025 Baijayanta Kumar Padhi …. Petitioner Mr. S.K. Dalai, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. …. Opposite Parties Mr. C.K. Pradhan, AGA Mr. P.K. Rath, Sr. Adv. for Bhadrak Municipality CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No. ORDER 15.07.2026 03. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties. 3. Since all the Writ Petitions relates to transfer and posting of the Petitioner from Bhadrak Municipality to Balimela N.A.C, all the Writ Petitioners were heard analogously and disposed of by the present common order. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that initially vide order dtd.17.02.2025 so passed by the Government-Opposite Party No.1, Petitioner when was put under transfer from Bhadrak Municipality to Balimela N.A.C, the same was assailed p. 2 p. 2 by the Petitioner in W.P.(C) No.6187 of 2025. This Court vide order dtd.04.03.2025 while disposing the Writ Petition permitted the Petitioner to approach Opposite Party No.2 therein for consideration of his grievance. This Court further observed that in the event Petitioner has not been relieved in the meantime, he shall not be relieved for a period of six weeks or till disposal of the Petitioner’s representation. 4.1. Subsequently, when no action was taken on the Petitioner’s representation, Petitioner filed W.P.(C) No.12341 of 2025, challenging the self-same order of transfer so passed on 17.02.2025. This Court vide order dtd.05.05.2025 while issuing notice of the matter passed an interim order with a direction to maintain status quo with regard to continuance of the Petitioner. 4.2. It is contended that in terms of the interim order passed on 05.05.2025, Petitioner was allowed to continue in Bhadrak Municipality. 4.3. However, when pursuant to the order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.6187 of 2025, Petitioner’s claim was rejected by Opposite Party No.2 challenging the same, Petitioner again approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.15369 of 2025. This Court vide order dtd.30.05.2025 issued notice of the Writ Petition p. 3 p. 3 without passing of any interim order. However in terms of the earlier interim order passed in W.P.(C) No.12341 of 2025, Petitioner continued in Bhadrak Municipality. 4.4. It is contended that while so continuing, Petitioner in terms of the Resolution dtd.28.05.2025, though was promoted to the rank of Asst. Engineer (Civil) under Odisha Municipal Engineering Service Cadre vide order dtd.31.03.2026 under Annexure-7, but vide the impugned notification dtd.07.07.2026 under Annexure-8, Petitioner has again been put under transfer from Bhadrak Municipality to Balimela NAC. 4.5. It is contended that since there is an interim order passed by this Court on 05.05.2025 in W.P.(C) No.12341 of 2025 directing for maintenance of status quo, Petitioner on his promotion could not have been put under transfer to Balimela N.A.C once again vide the impugned notification dtd.07.07.2026 under Annexure-8. 4.6. It is accordingly contended that impugned notification dtd.07.07.2026 requires interference of this Court and Petitioner on his promotion be also allowed to continue under Bhadrak Municipality. p. 4 p. 4 5. Mr. C.K. Pradhan, learned Addl. Government Advocate for the State on the other hand contended that since Petitioner has been transferred and posted on promotion to Balimela NAC vide the impugned notification dtd.07.07.2026 under Annexure-8, no interference is called for. 5.1. It is also contended that challenging the original order of transfer passed on 17.02.2025, Petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.6187 of 2025. This Court vide order dtd.04.03.2025 while disposing the Writ Petition directed the Petitioner to move Opposite Party No.2 for consideration of his grievance and passed an interim order to the effect that if the Petitioner has not been relieved in the meantime, he shall not be relieved for a period of six weeks or till disposal of the Petitioner’s representation. 5.2. However, on the face of such order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.6187 of 2025, Petitioner again by challenging the self-same order of transfer dtd.17.02.2025 approached this Court in W.P.(C) No.12341 of 2025. This Court vide order dtd.05.05.2025 passed an interim order by allowing the Petitioner to continue at Bhadrak and in terms of the said order, Petitioner is continuing. p. 5 p. 5 5.3. It is contended that since the order of transfer passed on 17.02.2025 was under challenge in W.P.(C) No.6187 of 2025, Petitioner on the face of the direction contained in order dtd.04.03.2025, could not have approached this Court once again by filing in W.P.(C) No.12341 of 2025. 5.4. It is also contended that pursuant to the order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.6187 of 2026, Petitioner’s claim when was rejected vide order dtd.23.05.2025 under Annexure-5, Petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.15369 of 2025 and this Court while issuing notice of the matter, never passed any interim order. 5.5. It is accordingly contended that since Petitioner initially vide order dtd.17.02.2025 was transferred to Balimela NAC and because of the interim order passed on 05.05.2025 in W.P.(C) No.12341 of 2025 is continuing at Bhadrak Municipality, he has been rightly put under transfer on promotion to Balimela NAC, which requires no interference. 6. Similar submission was also made by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for Bhadrak Municipality. p. 6 p. 6 6.1. It is further contended that since Petitioner has already rendered service for more than 30 years at Bhadrak and he is being transferred on getting the benefit of promotion, Petitioner instead of challenging the order should have joined in his place of transfer. 7. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made, this Court finds that Petitioner while continuing as a Junior Engineer (Civil) in Bhadrak Municipality, he was transferred and posted to Balimela N.A.C vide order dtd.17.02.2025. Challenging the said order, Petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.6187 of 2025 vide order dtd.04.03.2025. 7.1. This Court while disposing the Writ Petition permits the Petitioner to move Opposite Party No.2 for consideration of his grievance and passed an interim order to the effect that Petitioner will not be relieved for a period of six weeks or till consideration of his claim. 7.2. However, as found on the face of such order, passed by this Court, Petitioner again challenging the self-same order of transfer dtd.17.02.2025 approached this Court in W.P.(C) No.12341 of 2025. This Court while issuing notice of the matter, passed an interim order on 05.05.2025 directing for maintenance of p. 7 p. 7 status quo and in terms of the said order, Petitioner is continuing in Bhadrak Municipality, even though his claim pursuant to the order in W.P.(C) No.6187 of 2025 was rejected, vide order dtd.23.05.2025 under Annexure-5 which is the subject matter of challenge in W.P.(C) No.15369 of 2025. However, this Court while issuing notice of the matter never passed any interim order. 7.3. Be that as it may, since it is not disputed that Petitioner is continuing in Bhadrak Municipality as on date on the face of the earlier order of transfer passed on 17.02.2025, and vide the impugned notification dtd.07.07.2026 under Annexure-8, which is the subject matter of challenge in W.P.(C) No.21401 of 2026, Petitioner has been transferred and posted to Balimela NAC on promotion, this Court is of the view that Petitioner if is aggrieved by such order of transfer on promotion, has to move Opposite Party No.1 for consideration of his grievance. 7.4. Accordingly, this Court while disposing all the Writ Petitions, permits the Petitioner to make an appropriate application before Opposite Party No.1 on or before 24.07.2026. Opposite Party No.1 is directed to take a fresh decision by 01.08.2026. p. 8 p. 8 7.5. Till 01.08.2026 status quo as on today with regard to continuance of the Petitioner be maintained. Opposite Party No.1 however is free to take his own decision and this Court has not expressed any opinion on the claim of the Petitioner. 8. Accordingly, all the Writ Petitions stand disposed of. 9. Photocopy of the order be placed in other connected case records. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Subrat Judge