IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 22367 of 2026 Ajit Kumar Sahu ..... Petitioner Mr. S. Roy, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Mr. S. Das, ASC CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER 24.07.2026 Order No. 1 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the Opp. Parties. 3. Petitioner has filed the present writ petition inter alia with the following prayer:- ““It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit the writ petition and issue Rule “NISI” to the Opp. Parties to show cause as to; (i) Why the action of the Opposite Parties in not regularizing the service of the petitioner who is continuing as a Market Guard on contractual basis with effect from 01.08.2015 in the facts and circumstances of the case will not be declared as illegal; and (ii) Why the Opposite Party No.2 will not be directed to accord necessary approval to Opposite Party No.4 for regularizing the service of the petitioner forthwith; and (iii) Why the Opposite Party No.4 will not be directed to regularize the service of the petitioner with effect from Page 1 of 3.

01.08.2021 on receipt of such approval and to grant all Page 1 of 3 consequential service and financial benefits upon such regularization within a stipulated time; And, if the Opp. Parties do not show cause then the Rule be made absolute by issuing appropriate writ/writs and any other order as deem fit be passed; And for this act of kindness, the petitioner shall as in duty bound ever pray.”. 4. Considering the nature of order going to be passed, this Court is of the view that no notice need be issued to Opp. Party Nos.2 to 4. 5. It is contended that claim of the petitioner to get the benefit of regularization though has been accepted by the Opp. Party-RMC vide Annexures-3 & 5 proceeding dated 02.052022 and 02.03.2024, forwarded to Opp. Party No.2 vide Memo No.58 dated 12.05.2022 and Memo No.265 dated 15.03.2024, but in absence of the approval being given by Opp. Party No.2, petitioner is unable to get the benefit of regularization. 5.1. It is accordingly contended that Opp. Party No.2 be directed to approve the decision taken by the RMC in its proceeding dated 02.05.2022 and 02.03.2024 so forwarded on 15.03.2024 under Annexures-3 & 5. 6. Learned Additional Standing Counsel has no serious objection to the course of action proposed by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the submission made, this Court while disposing of the Writ Petition, directs Opp. Party No.2 to take a decision with regard to approval Page 2 of 3. of the decision taken by the RMC in the proceeding of the meeting held on 02.05.2022 and 02.03.2024 under Annexures-3 & 5 so forwarded to him vide Memo No.58 dated 12.05.2022 and Memo No.265 dated 15.03.2024 as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of 6 (six) weeks from the date of receipt of this order, if the same has not yet been disposed of. 8. The Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly. (BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge Subrat Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBRAT KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 30-Jul-2026 13:25:42 Page 3 of 3.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 22367 of 2026 Ajit Kumar Sahu ..... Petitioner Mr. S. Roy, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Mr. S. Das, ASC CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER 24.07.2026 Order No. 1 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the Opp. Parties. 3. Petitioner has filed the present writ petition inter alia with the following prayer:- ““It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit the writ petition and issue Rule “NISI” to the Opp. Parties to show cause as to; (i) Why the action of the Opposite Parties in not regularizing the service of the petitioner who is continuing as a Market Guard on contractual basis with effect from 01.08.2015 in the facts and circumstances of the case will not be declared as illegal; and (ii) Why the Opposite Party No.2 will not be directed to accord necessary approval to Opposite Party No.4 for regularizing the service of the petitioner forthwith; and (iii) Why the Opposite Party No.4 will not be directed to regularize the service of the petitioner with effect from Page 1 of 3.

01.08.2021 on receipt of such approval and to grant all Page 1 of 3 consequential service and financial benefits upon such regularization within a stipulated time; And, if the Opp. Parties do not show cause then the Rule be made absolute by issuing appropriate writ/writs and any other order as deem fit be passed; And for this act of kindness, the petitioner shall as in duty bound ever pray.”. 4. Considering the nature of order going to be passed, this Court is of the view that no notice need be issued to Opp. Party Nos.2 to 4. 5. It is contended that claim of the petitioner to get the benefit of regularization though has been accepted by the Opp. Party-RMC vide Annexures-3 & 5 proceeding dated 02.052022 and 02.03.2024, forwarded to Opp. Party No.2 vide Memo No.58 dated 12.05.2022 and Memo No.265 dated 15.03.2024, but in absence of the approval being given by Opp. Party No.2, petitioner is unable to get the benefit of regularization. 5.1. It is accordingly contended that Opp. Party No.2 be directed to approve the decision taken by the RMC in its proceeding dated 02.05.2022 and 02.03.2024 so forwarded on 15.03.2024 under Annexures-3 & 5. 6. Learned Additional Standing Counsel has no serious objection to the course of action proposed by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the submission made, this Court while disposing of the Writ Petition, directs Opp. Party No.2 to take a decision with regard to approval Page 2 of 3. of the decision taken by the RMC in the proceeding of the meeting held on 02.05.2022 and 02.03.2024 under Annexures-3 & 5 so forwarded to him vide Memo No.58 dated 12.05.2022 and Memo No.265 dated 15.03.2024 as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of 6 (six) weeks from the date of receipt of this order, if the same has not yet been disposed of. 8. The Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly. (BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge Subrat Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SUBRAT KUMAR BARIK Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 30-Jul-2026 13:25:42 Page 3 of 3.