IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C ) NO.849 of 2026 Manaswini Biswal …. Petitioner Mr. M.K. Khuntia, Adv. -versus- State of Odisha & Others …. Opposite Parties Mr. P. Behera, ASC COROM: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No ORDER 09.02.2026 2. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer: It is therefore humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit the case, call for the records and after hearing both the parties pass the following reliefs: (i)To declare the order dtd 16.12.2025 passed by opposite part no-1 in promoting opposite party no-5 to the post of Asst. Drugs Controller against unreserved vacancy as illegal being in violation of Principle laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Jarnail Singh and others vrs. Lachhmi Narayan Gupta and others reported in 2022(10) SCC 595. ii) To direct the opposite party no- 1 not to promote any reserved category candidate the post of Asst. Drugs Controller against unreserved vacancy. iii) To direct the opposite party no- 1 to consider the case of petitioner for promotion to the post of Asst.Drugs Controller against unreserved vacancy. (iv)And pass such other order/orders as may be deemed fit and proper for the interest of justice. iv)And for this act of kindness, the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray. 4. It is contended that because of pendency of the Departmental Proceeding as well as Criminal Proceeding, private Opp. Party No.5 was not extended with the benefit of promotion, when his junior get the said benefit as against reserved vacancy. But after his acquittal in the Criminal Proceeding and disposal of the Departmental Proceeding, basing on the recommendation of the DPC, private Opp. party No.5 though was extended with the benefit of promotion from the date his junior had got the benefit, but against an un-reserved vacancy, basing on the advise given by the SC & ST Development and by applying the principle of own merit. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that principle of own merit notified by the SC & ST Development Department, in the meantime, has been interfered with by this Court in its judgment dt. 22.01.2026 so passed in W.P.(C ) No.7674 of 2025 and batch. 4.1. Placing reliance on the said decision, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that petitioner be granted liberty to move Opp. party No.1 for re-consideration of the order of promotion issued in favour of Opp. Party No.5 vide notification dt.16.12.2025 and for its consideration within a stipulated time period. 5. Learned Addl. Standing Counsel has no serious objection to the course of action so proposed. 6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, considering the submission made and taking into account the claim raised in the present Writ Petition, liberty is granted to the Petitioner to move Opp. Party No.1 by enclosing all the relevant documents and citations in support of her claim as made in the Writ Petition, within a period of two(2) weeks hence. 6.1. It is observed that if such a representation will be filed within the aforesaid time period, Opp. Party No. 1 shall do well to take a lawful decision on the same within a period of 4(four) weeks from the date of receipt of such representation. The order so passed by Opp. Party No. 1 be communicated to the Petitioner. 7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) sangita Judge