Dismissed¶22

State of Odisha v. Rojalin Pattnaik

Orissa HC10 Mar 2026WA/769/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Odisha High Court (K.R. Mohapatra & S.K. Mishra, JJ.) dismissed State of Odisha's Writ Appeal W.A No.769 of 2022 on 10.03.2026 against Single Judge's order dt.16.12.2021 in W.P.(C) No.39267 of 2021 regularizing Rojalin Pattnaik per G.A. Department letter dt.17.09.2013 after six years' service against sanctioned posts; State conceded Patitapaban Dutta Dash ratio (W.P.(C) No.19951 of 2020) applicable; implementation ordered within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Writ Appeal dismissed; the learned Single Judge's regularization order in W.P.(C) No.39267 of 2021 to be implemented within eight weeks. ¶22

State of Odisha Vs Rojalin Pattnaik — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ Appeal dismissed; the learned Single Judge's regularization order in W.P.(C) No.39267 of 2021 to be implemented within eight weeks.

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether the Writ Appeal should succeed against the learned Single Judge's order dated 16.12.2021 in W.P.(C) No.39267 of 2021 directing regularization of the Respondent in terms of the G.A. Department letter dated 17.09.2013. +1 more

¶13

Court's answer

The Writ Appeal stands dismissed, and any other pending I.A. also stands dismissed.

¶22

Ratio / Principle

In view of the State's concession that the Patitapaban Dutta Dash ratio is squarely applicable and its decision to implement the impugned order, no further order is required to be passed in the Writ Appeal.

¶21

Key takeaways

The order passed in W.P.(C) No.39267 of 2021 is expected to be implemented within a period of eight weeks hence.ratio¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Appeal (W.A No.769 of 2022, High Court of Orissa at Cuttack; coram K.R. Mohapatra and S.K. Mishra, JJ.; order dated 10.03.2026) filed by the State of Odisha challenging the learned Single Judge's order dated 16.12.2021 in W.P.(C) No.39267 of 2021 directing regularization of the respondent Rojalin Pattnaik in terms of the G.A. Department letter dated 17.09.2013, having completed six years of service on appointment against sanctioned posts through due selection procedure. After this Court directed the State Counsel to examine the applicability of the ratio in Patitapaban Dutta Dash and others v. State of Odisha and others (W.P.(C) No.19951 of 2020, disposed 09.09.2021; confirmed in W.A No.777 of 2021; SLP(C) No.17482 of 2023 disposed of without interference), the State's Additional Standing Counsel conceded, on instruction, that the ratio is squarely applicable and that the State had decided to implement the impugned order. The Bench held no further order necessary, dismissed the Writ Appeal and all pending I.As, and expected implementation of the W.P.(C) No.39267 of 2021 order within eight weeks.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.A No. 769 OF 2022

¶3

State of Odisha and others …. Appellants

¶4

Mr. Siba Narayan Biswal, Additional Standing Counsel

¶5

-versus-

¶6

Rojalin Pattnaik

¶7

…. Respondent

¶8

Mr. Kabi Ranjan Mohanty, Advocate

¶9

CORAM: JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

¶10

Order No.

¶11

ORDER 10.03.2026

¶12

1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶13

This Writ Appeal has been filed challenging the order dated 16^th December, 2021 passed in W.P.(C) No.39267 of 2021, whereby learned Single Judge directed that the Respondent be regularized by issuing formal letters of regularization in terms of the G.A. Department letter dated 17^th September, 2013, as they have already completed six years of service, on being appointed against sanctioned posts by following due procedure of selection.

¶14

On the last occasion, Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel for the Respondent submitted that the ratio in the case of Patitapaban Dutta Dash and others –v- State of Odisha and others (W.P.(C) No.19951 of 2020), disposed of on 9^th September, 2021, is squarely applicable to this case. The said

¶15

order was challenged by the State Government in W.A No.777 Signature Not Verified

¶16

Page 1 of 2

¶17

Digitally Signed Signed by: MADHUSMITA SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 11-Mar-2026 17:20:24

¶18

of 2021 and was confirmed by this Court. Assailing the same, the State Government preferred SLP(C) No.17482 of 2023, which was disposed of without inferring with the order passed in the Writ Appeal.

¶19

3.1. Taking note of the same, this Court directed learned State Counsel to examine as to whether the ratio in the case of Patitapaban Dutta Dash and others (supra) is applicable to the case at hand or not.

¶20

Mr. Biswal, learned Additional Standing Counsel, on instruction, submits that the ratio in the case of Patitapaban Dutta Dash and others (supra) is squarely applicable to the instant case. Hence, the State Government has taken a decision to implement the order impugned herein.

¶21