Disposed¶5

Trinath Prasad Mohanty v. Union of India

Orissa HC9 Mar 2026WP(C)/1082/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Promotion denial during pendency of criminal case with cognizance taken; Recruitment and Promotion Policy for Workmen Para-15.1 / Para-10; Union of India; impugned order dt.09.12.2020 (Annexure-13); prior CRLMC No.1808 of 2016 dismissed for non-prosecution; writ disposed with liberty to reapply on acquittal; High Court of Orissa, single-judge bench (Biraja Prasanna Satapathy, J.), order dated 09.03.2026.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition disposed of with liberty to the Petitioner to reiterate his promotion claim by appropriate application if ultimately acquitted in the criminal proceeding, such claim to be considered in accordance with law. ¶5

Trinath Prasad Mohanty Vs Union of India — Orissa HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C ) No. 1082 of 2021

¶3

Trinath Prasad Mohanty ….

¶4

Petitioner Mr. S. Pattanaik, Adv.

¶5

-versus-

¶6

Union of India & Others

¶7

…. Opposite Parties Mr. D. Mohanty, Adv.

¶8

COROM:

¶9

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

¶10

Order No

¶11

ORDER 09.03.2026

¶12

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

¶13

2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶14

3. In course of hearing, it is fairly contended by the learned counsel appearing for the parties that Petitioner was not extended with the benefit of promotion in terms of provisions contained under Para-15.1 of the Recruitment and Promotion Policy for Workmen so enclosed vide Annexure-B/2 to the counter as the Petitioner was implicated in a Criminal case, where cognizance has already been taken.

¶15

3.1. It is also not disputed that challenging the order of cognizance, Petitioner though had approached this Court by filing CRLMC No.1808 of 2016, but the same has already been dismissed for

¶16

// 2 //

¶17

non-prosecution. It is also not disputed that claim for such promotion is covered under Para-10 of the aforesaid Recruitment and Promotion Policy.

¶18

4. This Court taking into account the provisions contained under Para-10 vis-à-vis Para-15, is of the view that since Petitioner has been implicated in a Criminal proceeding and cognizance has been taken, Petitioner is not eligible and entitled to get the benefit of promotions which has been rightly rejected vide the impugned order dt.09.12.2020 under Annexure-13. This Court accordingly is not inclined to interfere with the same.

¶19

4.1. However, it is observed that if Petitioner will be ultimately acquitted in the Criminal Proceeding, Petitioner can reiterate his claim by making appropriate application, which shall be considered in accordance with law.

¶20

5. With the aforesaid liberty, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

¶21

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge

¶22

sangita

¶23

Signature Not Verified

¶24

Digitally Signed Signed by: SANGITA PATRA Reason: authentication of order Location: high court of orissa, cut tack Date: 11-Mar-2026 18:52:06

¶25

Page 2 of 2

Trinath Prasad Mohanty v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Trinath Prasad Mohanty v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sharat Chandra Behera Vs Rourkela Steel Plant, Rourkela

Kailash Chandra Panda Vs State of Odisha

Dambarudhar Behera Vs State of Odisha

Rajendra Kumar Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Shantanu Kumar Swain Vs Aravind Agrawal, Commnr. Cum Secy., Govt. of Odisha, Higher Education

Siddhanta Kumar Mallik Vs State of Odisha