Authority: High Court of Odisha at Cuttack

Order Date: 16 October 2026

Case Overview

  • Petitioners: Swarna Prava Sahoo and others, represented by Mr. S. Jena, Advocate.
  • Opposite Parties: State of Odisha & others, represented by Mr. C. M. Singh, Assistant Solicitor General (ASC).
  • Writ Petition No.: W.P.(C) No.33896 of 2026 (CNR No.ODHC010808202026).
  • The petition seeks a direction for the State to (i) approve/regularise the petitioners' services against the respective posts in Sidheswar Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya, Gelapur, Jagatsinghpur, and (ii) release salary components in their favour as follows: 1/3rd of salary w.e.f. 01‑06‑2006, 2/3rd w.e.f. 01‑06‑2008, and full salary w.e.f. 01‑06‑2010, pursuant to the 1989 Adhoc principles (Annexure‑2 Series).
  • Additionally, the petition requests modification of approval orders issued under Annexures‑6 & 7, and grant of all other consequential service and financial benefits extended to similarly situated employees in other Sanskrit institutions.
  • The petition relies on Supreme Court judgments: State of U.P. v. Arvind Kumar Srivastava (2015) 1 SCC 347 and State of Karnataka v. C. Lalitha (2006) 2 SCC 747, and on the High Court’s own judgment in Ratnakar Mohapatra dated 19 March 2025.
  • Counsel argues that the petitioners are entitled to Grant‑in‑Aid under the 1989 Adhoc principle because their proposal was submitted before the principle’s repeal in 2009, and that the decision in State of Odisha & another v. Anup Kumar Senapati & another (2019) 19 SCC 626 does not bar extension of such benefits, a view upheld by the Apex Court.
  • The Court notes that, in the absence of any bar in Ratnakar Mohapatra, and despite the later decision in Anup Kumar Senapati, it is inclined to direct the opposite party to consider the petitioners’ representation (Annexure‑8) in line with settled law.

Final Outcome

  • The writ petition is disposed of with a direction to Opposite Party No.2 (the State) to take a decision on the representation annexed as Annexure‑8 and to pass a reasoned order preferably within four weeks from the receipt of a copy of this order.
  • The Court orders that an urgent certified copy of this order be issued as per the rules.
  • A copy of the order shall be handed over to Mr. C. M. Singh, ASC, for intimation and compliance.

Topics: Employment Benefits, Legal Precedent