Disposed¶21

Jaydeb Adik v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC16 Dec 2025WP(C)/15765/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Jaydeb Adik v. State of Odisha & Others; High Court of Orissa at Cuttack; W.P.(C) No.15765 of 2022; order dated 16.12.2025; Justice Biraja Prasanna Satapathy (single-judge bench); petitioner represented by S.K. Ojha, respondents by P.K. Panda (ASC); subject: regularisation of casual/daily wage employee's service, certiorari against order dt.08.06.2022 (Annexure-8) of Opposite Party No.2; disposed in light of judgment dt.14.10.2025 in W.P.(C) No.15881 of 2022; impugned order quashed; no monetary award; no statutory provisions cited.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 08.06.2022 (Annexure-8) passed by Opposite Party No.2 was quashed; the Writ Petition was disposed of in the light of this Court's judgment dt.14.10.2025 in W.P.(C) No.15881 of 2022. The Court did not itself rule separately on the regularisation demand. ¶21

Jaydeb Adik Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C )No.15765 of 2022

Jaydeb Adik

Petitioner

Mr. S.K. Ojha, Adv.

-versus-

State of Odisha & Others

¶7

Opposite Parties Mr. P.K. Panda, ASC

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

Order No.

ORDER

16.12.2025

10. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode.

¶14

2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶15

3. Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition inter alia with the following prayer:

¶16

Under the circumstances, this Hon'ble Court may be graciously pleased to issue rule NISI calling upon the Opp. Parties to show cause as to why the writ in the nature of Certiorari shall not be issued quashing order dated 08.06.2022 (Annex.8) and further writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ/writs shall not be issued directing the Opposite Parties to regularise the service of the Petitioner from the date of his initial appointment or from the date when he completed ten years as Casual/Daily wage employee in the Department with all consequential benefits as due and admissible. If the Opp.Parties failed to show cause or show insufficient cause rule may be made absolute.

¶17

// 2 //

¶18

And further be pleased to pass any other order/orders as deemed fit and proper,

¶19

4. It is contended by the learned counsel appearing for the Parties that the issue involved in the present case is covered by the judgment passed by this Court on 14.10.2025 in WP (C ) No.15881 of 2022.

¶20

5. Considering the submissions made, this Court while quashing the impugned order dt.08.06.2022 so passed by Opp.Party No.2 under Annexure-8, dispose of the Writ Petition in the light of the judgemnt00000000000 dt.14.10.2025 so passed in W.P.(C ) No.15881 of 2022.

¶21

6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

¶22

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge

¶23

sangita

¶24

Signature Not Verified

¶25

Digitally Signed Signed by: SANGITA PATRA Reason: authentication of order Location: high court of orissa, cut tack Date: 19-Dec-2025 16:06:02

¶26

Page 2 of 2

Jaydeb Adik v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaydeb Adik v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kashmir Lal Vs M/S.Ipinit

Rabindra Ku.Ghadai Vs State of Orissa

M/S.Puspa Oil Vs M/S.Ipinit

Ashok Transport Vs O.S.C.T. Corpn.

Prafulla Kumar Mallik Vs State of Orissa

Gopal Krushna Naik Vs State of Odisha