Dismissed¶32

State of Odisha v. K. Kranti Kumar

Orissa HC23 Feb 2026WA/86/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Orissa, Cuttack; W.A No. 86 OF 2022; State of Odisha v. K. Kranti Kumar; writ appeal dismissed 23.02.2026; condonation of delay 117 days; I.A. No.252 of 2022; regularization of services; W.P.(C) No.22101 of 2020 order dated 03.09.2020; Umadevi (2006) 4 SCC 1; M.L. Kesari SLP(C) No.15774 of 2006; G.A. Department resolution 17.09.2013; Patitapaban Dutta Dash W.P.(C) No.19951 of 2020; W.A No.777 of 2021 confirmed; SLP(C) No.17482 of 2023; W.A. No. 2027 of 2023; consequential service benefits; implementation within eight weeks; Justice K.R. Mohapatra; Justice Sanjay Kumar Mishra.

What did the court decide?

None granted to the appellants; the Writ Appeal and the delay-condonation application were dismissed, leaving the learned Single Judge's regularization order in W.P.(C) No.22101 of 2020 intact, with implementation expected within eight weeks.

State of Odisha Vs K. Kranti Kumar — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶32

Issue for consideration

Whether the delay of 117 days in filing the Writ Appeal should be condoned (I.A. No.252 of 2022). +1 more

¶18

Ratio / Principle

As the State Government acknowledged that the ratio in Patitapaban Dutta Dash and others is squarely applicable to the instant case and resolved to implement the impugned order, the Court held that no further order was required to be passed either in the I.A. or in the Writ Appeal.

¶28

Key takeaways

Both the I.A. (condonation of delay) and the Writ Appeal stand dismissed; any other pending I.A. also stands dismissed.ratio¶32
The Court expects the order passed in W.P.(C) No.22101 of 2020 to be implemented within a period of eight weeks.obiter¶33

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Appeal (W.A No. 86 OF 2022) by the State of Odisha and another, filed with I.A. No.252 of 2022 seeking condonation of 117 days' delay, challenging the learned Single Judge's order dated 3rd September, 2020 in W.P.(C) No.22101 of 2020, which had directed regularization of the services of K. Kranti Kumar and another in terms of the Umadevi ((2006) 4 SCC 1) and M.L. Kesari (SLP(C) No.15774 of 2006) judgments and the G.A. Department resolution dated 17th September, 2013, with consequential service benefits. Taking note of the parallel matter W.A. No. 2027 of 2023 — where the Patitapaban Dutta Dash order (W.P.(C) No.19951 of 2020, disposed of 9th September, 2021) had been confirmed in W.A No.777 of 2021 and the State's SLP(C) No.17482 of 2023 was disposed of without interference — the Court had the Additional Government Advocate confirm applicability of the same ratio; the State resolved to implement the impugned order. Consequently, on 23.02.2026 (Coram: Justice K.R. Mohapatra and Justice Sanjay Kumar Mishra), both the I.A. and the Writ Appeal were dismissed, with implementation of the Single Judge's order expected within eight weeks.

¶1

Signature Not Verified

¶2

Digitally Signed Signed by: MADHUSMITA SAHOO Designation: SENIOR STENOGRAPHER Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 24-Feb-2026 12:09:05

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶4

W.A No. 86 OF 2022

¶5

State of Odisha and another

¶6

…. Appellants

¶7

Mr. Bibekananda Nayak, Additional Government Advocate

¶8

-versus-

¶9

K. Kranti Kumar and another

¶10

…. Respondents

¶11

Mr. Atul Tripathy, Advocate

¶12

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

ORDER

Order No.

23.02.2026

I.A. No.252 of 2022 & WA No. 86 OF 2022

¶17

1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶18

I.A. No.252 of 2022 has been filed for condonation of delay of 117 days in filing the Writ Appeal.

¶19

The I.A. as well as the Writ Appeal are taken up together on the basis of the instructions received by Mr. Nayak, learned Additional Government Advocate.

¶20

This Writ Appeal has been filed challenging the order dated 3^rd September, 2020 passed in W.P.(C) No.22101 of 2020, whereby learned Single Judge directed to regularize the services of the Respondents keeping in view the judgment in the case of Secretary State of Karnataka CMP No.1360 of 2014, W.P.(C) No.19996 of 2020 -2- and others –v- Umadevi (3) and others, (2006) 4 SCC 1 and in State of Karnataka and others –v- M.L. Kesari and others , involving SLP(C) No.15774 of 2006 and also

¶21

Page 1 of 3

¶22

Signature Not Verified

¶23

Digitally Signed Signed by: MADHUSMITA SAHOO Designation: SENIOR STENOGRAPHER Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 24-Feb-2026 12:09:05

¶24

the resolution of the G.A. Department dated 17^th September, 2013, within a period of four months from the date of the communication of a copy of the order by the Respondents and grant consequential service benefits as due admissible to them.

¶25

In a similar matter, i.e., W.A. No. 2027 of 2023 (listed along with this Writ Appeal), Mr. Tripathy, learned counsel for the Respondents 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 order was challenged by the State Government in W.A No.777 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.

¶26

5.1. Taking note of the same, this Court directed Mr. Nayak, learned Additional Government Advocate 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.

¶27

Mr. Nayak, learned Additional Government Advocate, 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.

¶28

In view of the above, no further order is required to be passed either in the I.A. or in the Writ Appeal.

¶29

Page 2 of 3

¶30

Signature Not Verified

¶31

Digitally Signed Signed by: MADHUSMITA SAHOO Designation: SENIOR STENOGRAPHER Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 24-Feb-2026 12:09:05

¶32