Orissa High Court
Pundariksh Podhi vs State Of Odisha & Others on 11 August, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.22993 OF 2021
Pundariksh Podhi ..... Petitioner
Mr. P.K. Rout, Advocate
Vs.
State of Odisha & others ..... Opposite party
Mr. D.K. Mohanty, ASC
CORAM:
DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI
ORDER
11.08.2021
Order No. This matter is taken up by video conferencing
mode.
Heard Mr. P.K. Rout, learned counsel for the
petitioner.
The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking
direction to the opposite parties to regularize his
services taking into account his continuous service, as
expeditiously as possible.
Mr. P.K. Rout, learned counsel for the petitioner
states that the petitioner has been continuing as a DLR
employee under the Executive Engineer, RWSS Division,
Kalahandi, but till date he has not been regularized,
although more than 27 years have passed in the
meantime. He has referred to the case of State of
Karnataka v. Umadevi, 2006(4) SCC 1, wherein in
paragraph 53, the apex Court has held that the State
Governments and their instrumentalities should take
steps to regularize as a one-time measure the services
of such irregularly appointed who have worked for ten
years or more in duly sanctioned posts. Similar view has
also been taken by the apex Court in State of
Karnataka and others v. M.L.Keshari and others,
2010(II) OLR (SC) 982, wherein in paragraph 7 the apex
Court has held as follows :
"7. It is evident from the above that there is an
exception to the general principles against 'regularization'
enunciated in Umadevi if the following conditions are
fulfilled:
(i) The employee concerned should have worked for 10
years or more in duly sanctioned post without the
benefit or protection of the interim order of any court
or tribunal. In other words, the State Government or
its instrumentality should have employed the
employee and continued him in service voluntarily
and continuously for more than ten years.
(ii) The appointment of such employee should not be
illegal even if irregular. Where the appointments are
not made or continued against sanctioned posts or
where the persons appointed do not possesses the
prescribed minimum qualifications, the appointments
will be considered to be illegal. But where the person
employed possessed the prescribed qualifications and
was working against sanctioned posts, but had been
selected without undergoing the process of open
competitive-selection, such appointments are
considered to be irregular."
In that view of the matter, since the petitioner is
continuing as DLR employee and completed 27 years
of service in the meantime and even though his
appointment is irregular he should be regularized in
service in view of the judgments of the apex Court in
Umadevi and M.L.Keshari (supra), as well as
Amarkanti Rai v. State of Bihar and others,
(2015) 8 SCC 265.
In view of such position, the opposite parties are
directed to consider the case of the petitioner for
regularization of his service within a period of three
months from the date of passing of this order.
With the aforesaid observation and direction, the
writ petition is allowed.
Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.
Alok
(DR. B.R. SARANGI)
JUDGE
