Orissa High Court
Poulasti Kumar Pradhan vs State Of Odisha & Ors. .... ... on 10 February, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WPC(OAC) NO. 3190 OF 2014
Poulasti Kumar Pradhan .... Petitioner
Mr.Sashibhusan Jena, Sr. Adv.
-versus-
State of Odisha & Ors. .... Opp.Parties
Mr. G.R.Mohapatra,
ASC.
CORAM:
DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI
Order ORDER
No. 10.02.2023
02 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
3. The petitioner had filed an O.A. before the learned
Odisha Administrative Tribunal seeking regularization of
service with effect from 02.09.1993 in stead of 05.07.2012
along with all consequential service benefits at par with
the similar circumstances employees. Thereafter, the said
matter has been transferred to this Court after abolition
of the learned Odisha Administrative Tribunal.
4. The brief facts of the case is that the petitioner joined
in his service on 02.03.1993 for 89 days against vacancy of
Regular Class-IV post under Mahanadi South Division.
Page 1 of 4
// 2 //
The Assistant Engineer, Manijanga had recommended
for regularization of the petitioner in the said post.
Simultaneously, four persons who were appointed under
the Mahanadi North Division like the present petitioner
were regularized but the case of the petitioner has been
discriminated in spite of the best performance report
submitted in his favour.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that law is
well settled that if a person worked for six years in work
charged establishment, is to be regularized against the
regular post. Although the circular has been made in this
regard by the Government, it has not been given effect to
in the case of the petitioner. Consequently, the petitioner
had filed an O.A bearing No.1155(C)/1998 seeking a
direction of the learned Tribunal to the Opposite parties
for regularization of his adhoc post and releasing all
arrears as per pay revisions of the State Government
based on the services rendered by him since March, 1993.
6. It is further submitted that the said O.A was disposed
of along with other identical cases wherein the learned
Tribunal passed common judgment on 08.01.1999
directing the opposite parties to regularize the services of
the petitioner within a period of four months. It is further
// 3 //
submitted that though the similar circumstances persons
have been regularized in the month of December, 1993
but the petitioner has been regularized after twenty years
i.e. on 05.07.2012. Later on receiving a copy of the order
dated 05.07.2012, the petitioner submitted a
representation to the Executive Engineer, Mahanadi
South Division with a copy to the Superintending
Engineer, Cuttack mentioning therein that since similarly
placed employees have been regularized with effect from
30.12.1993
, the said benefit should be granted in his
favour.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner draws attention of
the Court to the service books filed under Annexure-F
Series of some of the similarly placed employees who
have been regularized from the date antedating of their
date of entry into service i.e. 02.03.1993. Moreover, the
petitioner has filed representation dated 17.02.2014 under
Annexure-9 ventilating his grievances which is still
pending till date without consideration.
8. Considering the above facts and submissions made and
without going into the merits of the case, it is directed
that the State /opposite party shall pass an reasoned order
with respect to the regularization of the petitioner with
effect from 02.03.1993 in stead of 05.07.2012 along with all
consequential service benefits at par with the similar
// 4 //
circumstanced employees whose services have been
regularized.
9. With the aforesaid observation, the Writ Petition (Civil)
stands disposed of.
10. Issue urgent certified copy of the order as per Rules.
(Dr. S.K. Panigrahi)
Judge
LB
