Orissa High Court
Shibaji Sethy And Others vs State Of Odisha And Others on 9 May, 2022
cIN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.9526 of 2022
Shibaji Sethy and others .... Petitioners
Mr. Gyanaranjan Sethi, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opposite Parties
Mr.YSP Babu, AGA for State
CORAM:
JUSTICE A.K.MOHAPATRA
ORDER
09.05.2022
Order No.
01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement
(Virtual/Physical Mode).
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel
for the State.
3. Learned counsel for the Petitioners states that the Petitioners
have been continuing as Casual Labourers on NMR basis under the
Chief District Veterinary Officer, Balasore, but till date they have
not been regularized, although more than 30 years have passed in the
meantime. He has referred to the case of State of Karnataka vs.
Umadevi, reported in 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 the case of State of Karnataka and
// 2 //
others vs. M.L.Keshari and others, reported in 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.
4. In that view of the matter, since the Petitioners are
continuing as Casual Labourers on NMR Basis under the Chief
District Veterinary Officer, Balasore and completed 30 years of
service in the meantime and even though their appointment is
irregular they 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 vs. State of Bihar and others, reported in
(2015) 8 SCC 265.
5. In view of such position, the opposite parties are directed to
regularize the service of the Petitioners within a period of three
months from the date of passing of this order.
// 3 //
6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ
petition is allowed.
7. Urgent certified copy be granted on proper application.
(A.K. Mohapatra)
Judge
U.K.Sahoo
