Page 1 of 3. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.7824 of 2026 Nalinikanta Khuntia ..... Petitioner Represented by Adv. - Nihal Rath -versus- State Of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Represented by Adv. - Mr. S.Behera, A.G.A. CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA ORDER 23.03.2026 Order No. 02. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual /Physical Mode). 2. The subject matter of this petition is substantially similar to the one in W.P.(C) No.2552 of 2023 between Rashmi Ranjan Pattanayak v. State of Odisha disposed of by this Court vide judgment dated 17.11.2025, wherein the operative portion reads as under; "Therefore, under the facts and circumstances stated above, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble court may graciously be pleased to admit the writ application, issue rule NISI calling upon the 0pp. Parties to show cause, and after hearing the counsels for the respective parties, may be pleased to allow the writ application by directing the 0pp. Parties to regularise service of the Page 2 of 3. petitioner by creating the post of Data Entry Operator or against the post of Junior Assistant by relaxing the Rules in force, if any, and to grant all consequential service and financial benefits by quashing impugned letters dtd. 27.05.2019 (Annexure-14) &dtd. 26.11.2020 (Annexure-15) declaring the same to be arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional.” 3. It is a settled position of law that the like cases should be decided alike and where a set of litigants are granted a particular relief, others standing on the similar pedestal cannot be denied the same relief, subject to all just exceptions. The argued case of the present Petitioner does not fit into any such exceptions. 4. In the above circumstances, this Writ Petition succeeds; a writ of certiorari is issued quashing the impugned order whereby regularization has been denied to the Petitioner, a writ of mandamus is issued to the Opposite Parties to examine the matter in the light of the aforesaid judgment and in the event it is found that the Petitioner has completed six years of continuous service, as has been held in the above noted case and the Government Resolution dated 17.09.2013, then necessary order be passed for regularizing the service of the Petitioner and grant of all consequential benefits to him within a period of six weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, failing which, the Petitioner may move an application for levying heavy costs on the concerned officials, payable from their pocket for the delay brooked. Page 3 of 3. Now no costs. Web copy of the order to be acted upon by all concerned. (A.K. Mohapatra) Judge Rubi