BRAJA KISHORE MOHANTY Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petition prayer is as under:

(2.) Essentially, petitioner seeks quashment of the order dtd. 20/8/2022, whereby his case has been treated as of fresh appointment to the post in question. Counsel for the petitioner submits that it was not a case of fresh appointment but was of regularization of service pursuant to order dtd. 9/2/2016 entered by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No.15725 of 2012. The Co-ordinate Judge had granted a period of three months for implementation. It was a definite direction for regularization, as distinguished from a direction for consideration of case for regularization. Counsel also submits that matter went in W.A. No.231 of 2016 by the OPs and the same was negatived by the Division Bench on 16/12/2021; lastly OPs' SLP (C) No.4893 of 2022 also met the same fate at the hands of Apex Court of the country vide order dtd. 17/5/2022. That being the position, he seeks indulgence of this Court.

(3.) Learned Panel Counsel appearing for the OPs vehemently resists the petition contending that whatever be the arguable infirmity in the impugned order, interference of this Court is not warranted, since broadly justice has been done by granting appointment order to him. He also highlights the word "consider" employed by the Division Bench in its judgment dtd. 6/12/2021 and therefore, the impugned order accords with the spirit of said order. He also tells the Court that the post itself was not available and therefore, the question of regularization could not be treated in a normative way and therefore, fresh appointment has been issued to the petitioner. So contending, he seeks dismissal of the writ petition.