Orissa High Court
Mahendra Kumar Sahu vs State Of Odisha & Ors on 8 October, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.31862 OF 2021
Mahendra Kumar Sahu ..... Petitioner
Mr. S.B. Biswal, Advocate
Vs.
State of Odisha & Ors. ..... Opposite parties
State Counsel
CORAM:
DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI
ORDER
08.10.2021
Order No. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
3. The petitioner, who has been engaged as a Peon on
daily wages in the year 2006, has filed this application
seeking for a direction to regularize his service and grant all
consequential benefits as due and admissible to him in
accordance with law.
4. Mr. S.B. Biswal, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner is continuing as a Driver under
Bargarh Block, Bargarh w.e.f. 2006 and in the meantime 15
years have passed and as such, there is need of the post and
pursuant to which he has been continuing in his service.
Therefore, his service should be regularized against the said
post. He has relied upon the judgment of the apex Court in
State of Karnataka and Others 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."
5. In that view of the matter, since the petitioner is
continuing against a post of Peon since last 15 years and even
though his appointment is irregular, he should be regularized
in service in view of the judgment of the apex Court in
Umadevi (supra) and M.L.Keshari (supra).
6. It is of relevance to note that in a similar case, in
respect of Angul Municipality, this Court vide order dated
27.11.2014 in W.P.(C) No. 26860 of 2013 directed the
opposite parties to regularize the services of the petitioner
therein in view of the judgments of the apex Court in
Umadevi (supra) and M.L.Keshari (supra). Against the said
order dated 27.11.2014 the State of Odisha, as well as Angul
Municipality preferred W.A. No. 407 of 2015 which was
dismissed on 19.01.2016. Against the order dated 19.01.2016
passed in W.A. No. 407 of 2015, the State as well as Angul
Municipality filed S.L.P. before the apex Court and by a
common order dated 13.05.2016 the S.L.P. was dismissed.
Consequentially, the State authorities issued office order
dated 06.06.2016 for regularizing the petitioner in the said
writ application. Similar relief has already been granted to
the employee of Paradeep Municipality in W.P.(C) No.
10100 of 2010 disposed of on 07.07.2017. Therefore, the
petitioner having same footing, benefit should be extended to
him by regularizing his service as expeditiously as possible.
7. Considering the contention raised by learned counsel
for the parties and after going through the records since the
petitioner is rendering service since last 15 years
uninterruptedly and he has been allowed to draw house rent
and other allowances as due and admissible to the post that
itself indicates that there is need of the said post and as such
the petitioner is continuing in service uninterruptedly for a
quite long period. In view of the law laid down by the apex
Court in Umadevi (supra) and M.L.Keshari (supra) and also
the order of this Court, dated 27.11.2014, which has been
confirmed by the apex Court so far as employees of Angul
Municipality is concerned, the opposite parties are directed to
regularize the service of the petitioner as expeditiously as
possible preferably within a period of three months from the
date of passing of this order and also grant all consequential
benefit as due and admissible to him in accordance with law.
8. With the aforesaid observation and direction the writ
petition is allowed.
Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.
Alok
(DR. B.R. SARANGI)
JUDGE
