Orissa High Court
Contempt Petition Arises Was ... vs Umadevi (3) And on 8 April, 2021
CONTC No.2167 of 2020
4. 8.04.2021 This matter is taken up by video conferencing mode.
Heard learned counsel for Petitioner.
This is a second round of litigation. The writ petition
bearing W.P.(C) No.15120 of 2020 from which the present
Contempt Petition arises was filed for regularization of
services of the Petitioner and the same was disposed of
with the following direction:
"Considering the contentions raised by
the learned counsel for the Petitioner and after
going through the records, it appears that the
Petitioner has rendered service for more than
23 years on contractual basis. Therefore the
case of the Petitioner is squarely covered by
the ratio decided in Secretary State of
Karnataka and Others V. Umadevi (3) and
Others (2006) 4 SCC 1.
In that view of the matter, this Court
disposes of this writ petition directing the
Opposite Parties to consider the case of the
Petitioner and regularize her services keeping
in view the judgment in Secretary State of
Karnataka and Others V. Umadevi (3) and
Others (2006) 4 SCC 1 within a period of four
months and grant consequential service
benefits as due admissible to him."
On reading of the aforesaid direction, it appears,
there remains no doubt, there is clear mandate for
regularization of the services of the Petitioner in terms of
the direction in (2006) 4 SCC 1 within a period of four
months. In the 4th paragraph of the order dated 4.09.2019
passed in W.P.(C) No.15120 of 2019 there is clear recording
that the case of the Petitioner is squarely covered by the
ratio decided in the case of Secretary State of Karnataka
and Others V. Umadevi (3) and Others : (2006) 4 SCC 1.
There remains no ambiguity in understanding the order of
2
this Court dated 4.09.2019 passed in W.P.(C) No.15120 of
2019.
Looking to the office order dated 18.04.2020, it is
unfortunate to note here that in working out the order
dated 4.09.2019 Mr. Biswajit Keshari Das, Managing
Director, Odisha State Civil Supply Corporation Ltd.-the
Contemnor-Opposite Party No.2 has not only attempted to
sit over the order of this Court dated 4.09.2019 but
functioning as an appellate authority has also gone to the
extent passing the order as follows:
"For which it is constitutionally
impermissible to regularize such
appointments. Further, the Apex Court also
made an observation at para 34 in the leading
case of State of Karnatak and others vrs.
Umadevi that temporary employee could not
claim to be made permanent on the expiry of
his term of appointment. It has further
clarified that merely because temporary or
causal wage worker is continued for a time
beyond the term of his appointment, he would
not be entitled to be absorbed in regular
service or made permanent, merely on the
strength of such continuance, if the original
appointment was not made by following a due
process of selection as envisaged by a relevant
rules.
In spite of these facts, Corporation has
always made genuine efforts to provide RACP
benefits to you and to all other similarly placed
person with due approval of Government by
approaching Finance Department, State of
Odisha through its Administrative Department
i.e. F.S. & C.W. Department. But, the same
was rejected vide letter communication bearing
No.11439 dtd. 03.08.2019 wherein, it has been
communicated that Finance Department has
rejected the proposal for extension of RACP
scheme in favour of Until Further Order
category of employee of OSCSC Ltd. as they are
not regular Govt. servants and there is no
promotional prospects or cadre rule for such
employees.
3
In view of the above, your request for
regularization is herewith rejected. The order
dated 4.9.2019 of Hon'ble High Court passed
in W.P.(C) No.15120/2019 is herewith
complied."
It is unfortunate to note here that by the above order
the contemnor is claiming to have complied with the
direction of this Court. This Court finds, the Contemnor
has attempted to interfere in the order of this Court and
has even made a false affidavit claiming that there has
been compliance of the order of this Court dated 4.09.2019
passed in W.P.(C) No.15120 of 2019 and that too such
development is taking place even after disposal of a
contempt petition involving this issue.
Mr. S.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the Contemnor-
Opposite Party No.2 in justifying the action of the
Contemnor-Opposite Party No.2 submitted that for the
direction of this Court in the writ petition in permitting the
contemnor-Opposite Party No.2 to consider the case of the
Petitioner in the matter of regularization of her services, the
Opposite Party No.2 has rightly passed the order.
Considering the submissions made by the parties
and going through the direction of this Court in disposal of
the W.P.(C) No.15120 of 2019, this Court is of the opinion
that there remained scope for consideration of the case of
the Petitioner and for the observation and direction therein,
the only option available to the Contemnors is, in the event
the Contemnors-Opposite Parties 1 & 2 are aggrieved by
such order, they could have approached the higher forum.
Since there is no such challenge to the order dated
4.09.2019 passed in W.P.(C) No.15120 of 2019 as of now
4
and taking serious note of the conduct of Mr. Biswajit
Keshari Das and for his deliberate violation of this Court's
direction in the disposal of the writ petition and even taking
false plea on compliance of direction of this Court, this
Court directs Mr. Biswajit Keshari Das, Managing Director,
Odisha State Civil Supply Corporation Ltd.-Opposite Party
No.2 to appear in person in Court on 26th April, 2021 and
explain as to why he will not be punished under the
Contempt of Courts Act. Requisites for issuance of notice
by way of Speed Post with A.D. shall be filed within three
working days hence. Pendency of the contempt application
shall not stand on the way of the Contemnor-Opposite
Party No.2 to recall the order dated 18.04.2020 and pass
order in terms of the direction dated 4.09.2019 in W.P.(C)
No.15120 of 2019, by recalling of his previous order dated
18.04.2020 in the meanwhile.
List this matter on 26th April, 2021.
As restrictions due to COVID-19 situation are
continuing, learned counsel for the parties may utilize a
soft copy of this order available in the High Court's website
or print out thereof at par with certified copy in the manner
prescribed, vide Court's Notice No.4587, dated 25th March,
2020.
..............................
(Biswanath Rath, J.)
Ayas
