Disposed¶26

Raghunath Behera v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC13 Nov 2025WP(C)/9652/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Orissa High Court, Cuttack; W.P.(C) No.9652 of 2024; Justice Biraja Prasanna Satapathy; order dated 13.11.2025; disposed. Keywords: contractual appointment; regular appointment; Class-IV employee; Tahasildar, Begunia; temporary continuation; out-sourcing; rejection of claim; Annexure-13; Annexure-4 & 5 series; Annexure-12 series; W.P.(C) No.1092 of 2023; interim order 24.04.2024; four-week fresh order direction; Opposite Party No.2; State of Odisha.

What did the court decide?

Fresh order by Opposite Party No.2 within four weeks of receipt of this order, permitting the Petitioner to continue in the post on temporary basis or through out-sourcing if the post has not been filled up on regular basis. ¶26

Raghunath Behera Vs State of Odisha — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether the Petitioner, working as a Class-IV employee in the Office of Tahasildar, Begunia since 2011 without a formal engagement order, is entitled to appointment on contractual or regular basis notwithstanding rejection of his claim by Opposite Party No.2. +1 more

¶16

Court's answer

Considering the submissions and the recommendations under Annexure-4 & 5 series and Annexure-12 series, this Court held that if the post in question has not yet been filled up on regular basis, the Petitioner shall be allowed to continue in the said post on temporary basis, even through out-sourcing.

¶25

Ratio / Principle

While disposing of the Writ Petition, the Court directed Opposite Party No.2 to pass a fresh order allowing the Petitioner to continue in the post in question either on temporary basis or through out-sourcing, with an appropriate order to be passed within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order.

¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (W.P.(C ) No.9652 of 2024), High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, decided on 13.11.2025 by Justice Biraja Prasanna Satapathy. Raghunath Behera, continuing as a Class-IV employee in the Office of Tahasildar, Begunia since 2011 without a formal engagement order, challenged rejection by Opposite Party No.2 (impugned order dt.05.12.2023, Annexure-13) of his claim for contractual or regular appointment; his earlier plea in W.P.(C) No.1092 of 2023 and forwarding of his claim vide Annexure-4 & 5 series and Annexure-12 series letters were noted; notice issued 24.02.2024 drew no counter affidavit and the interim order of 24.04.2024 was not acted upon. Having regard to the recommendations on record, the Court disposed of the Writ Petition, holding that where the post has not been filled up on regular basis the Petitioner is to be allowed to continue therein on temporary basis even through out-sourcing, and directed Opposite Party No.2 to pass a fresh order to that effect within four weeks of its receipt. No statutory provision or precedent case was cited.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C ) No.9652 of 2024

¶3

Raghunath Behera …. Petitioner

¶4

Mr. D. Mishra, Adv.

¶5

-versus-

¶6

State of Odisha & Others

¶7

…. Opposite Parties Mr.A. Tripathy, AGA

¶8

COROM:

¶9

JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

Order

ORDER

13.11.2025

4. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode.

¶15

2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶16

3. The present Writ Petition has been filed inter alia challenging rejection of the Petitioner’s claim to get the benefit of appointment as against a contractual or regular Class-IV post in the Office of Tahasildar, Begunia.

¶17

4. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that, even though Petitioner is continuing as a Class-IV employee in the office of Tahasildar, Begunia with effect from the year 2011, but when he was not issued with any formal order of engagement, Petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.(C ) No.1092 of

¶18

// 2 //

¶19

2023 with a prayer to provide him appointment either on contractual or regular basis.

¶20

4. 1. It is also contended that claim of the Petitioner for being provided with such order of appointment though was forwarded vide Annexure-4 & 5 series as well as vide letters issued under Annexure-12 series, but without proper appreciation of the same, Opp. Party No.2 rejected such claim of the Petitioner vide the impugned order dt.05.12.2023 under Annexure-13.

¶21

4. 2. It is also contended that after passing of the impugned order on 05.12.2023, Petitioner is not being allowed to discharge his duty. It is accordingly contended that Opp. party No.2 be directed to allow the Petitioner to continue on temporary basis, even if through out-sourcing, as Petitioner has got no other source of income to maintain his livelihood. It is also contended that the post in which Petitioner was working since 2011, has not been filled up in the Office of Tahasildar, Begunia-Opp. Party No.4.

¶22

5. Even though notice of the Writ Petition has been issued since 24.02.2024, but no counter affidavit has been filed. However, it is contended that since Petitioner is not being allowed to discharge his duty after passing of the impugned order, interim order passed by this Court on 24.04.2024 was not acted upon.

¶23

Page 2 of 3

¶24

// 3 //

¶25

6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and considering the submission made and the recommendation available under Annexure-4 & 5 series as well as under Annexure-12 series, it is the view of this Court that if the post in question has not yet been filled up on regular basis, Petitioner be allowed to continue in the said post on temporary basis, even through out-sourcing. Accordingly, this Court while disposing the Writ Petition directs Opp. Party No.2 to pass a fresh order by allowing the Petitioner to continue in the post in question either on temporary basis or through out-sourcing with passing of an appropriate order within a period of 4 (four) weeks from the date of receipt of this order.

¶26

6.1. The Writ Petition accordingly stands disposed of.

¶27

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge

¶28

sangita

¶29

Signature Not Verified

¶30

Digitally Signed Signed by: SANGITA PATRA Reason: authenticaton of order Location: high court of orissa, cut tack Date: 17-Nov-2025 18:43:36

¶31

Page 3 of 3