IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.6716 of 2026 Samarebdra Bisoi …. Petitioner Mr. P.K. Rath, Sr. Advocate with Mr. A. Behera, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and Others …. Opp. Parties Mr. S.P. Das, ASC CORAM: JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY Order No ORDER 09.03.2026 02. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode. 2. Heard Mr. P.K. Rath, learned Senior Counsel along with Mr. A. Behera, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.P. Das, learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State. 3. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer: - “The petitioner, therefore, prays that your Lordships would be graciously pleased to admit this Writ Petition, call for the records and after hearing the parties allow the same, issue writ/writs in the nature of certiorari/ mandamus and/or any other further writ/direction and set aside the memorandum of charge vide office DO No 1001 dated 13.08.2025 under Annexure-1& consequential initiation of disciplinary proceeding vide Signal Estt. Proceeding No- 3 of 2025 against the petitioner.” p. 2 p. 2 4. It is contended that the departmental proceeding in question has been initiated only on the ground that petitioner in terms of order dated 11.07.2025, never joined in his place of transfer in spite of repeated reminder and he canvassed before Higher Authority for cancelling the order of transfer. 4.1. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that after receipt of the Memorandum along with charge, petitioner has already submitted his reply on 04.11.2025 under Annexure-11 by taking all the grounds available to him. 4.2. However, it is contended that petitioner after issuance of the order of transfer on 11.07.2025 under Annexure-5, was only relieved vide order dated 03.08.2025 under Annexure-8. After being so relieved vide order dated 03.08.2025, petitioner joined in his place of transfer on 11.08.2025, so reflected in order dated 13.08.2025 under Annexure-9. 4.3. It is accordingly contended that petitioner since on the face of the order of transfer issued on 11.07.2025 under Annexure-5 was only relieved on 03.08.2025, and he joined on 11.08.2025, no fault can be found with the petitioner for his not joining immediately on being communicated with the order of transfer dated 11.07.2025 and the charge that petitioner on the face of repeated reminder never joined is not a fact. p. 3 p. 3 4.4. It is also contended that Book Circular No.42 is not applicable to the petitioner’s case, as the said circular is only applicable for transfer of Gazetted Officer of State Civil Services. It is accordingly contended that Opp. Party No.2 be directed to take a decision on the initiation of the proceeding taking into account the reply submitted by the petitioner under Annexure-12. 5. Learned Addl. Standing Counsel however contended that since the present Writ Petition has been filed challenging initiation of the proceeding, the Writ Petition is not maintainable. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the submissions made, this Court while disposing the Writ Petition, directs Opp. Party No.3 to take into account the reply made by the petitioner under Annexure-12 and the provisions contained under Book Circular No.42 while deciding the proceeding in accordance with law. Opp. Party No.4 is also directed to consider the fact that petitioner on the face of the order of transfer issued on 11.07.2025, was only relieved on 03.08.2025 and he joined on 11.08.2025. 7. The Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly. (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Basudev