Orissa High Court
Sujata Mishra vs State Of Odisha And Others on 2 May, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C). No.13503 of 2023
Sujata Mishra .... Petitioner
Mr. B.S. Tripathy-1, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opposite Parties
Mr. A. Behera, A.S.C.
CORAM:
JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA
ORDER
Order No. 02.05.2023
01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual
/Physical Mode).
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned
counsel for the State. Perused the writ petition as well as documents
annexed thereto.
3. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with
the following prayers:
"On the facts and in the circumstances stated
above, your petitioner, therefore, prayed that this
Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct to the OP.no.2 to
forthwith issue formal orders infavour of the petitioner
regularizing her services as Data Entry Operator in its
establishments with effect from her completing six years
of contractual services in the scale of pay PB-1-
Rs.5,200-20,200/- + GP Rs.1900/- with usual
allowances admissible from time to time as per GA
Department Resolution dt.17.09.2013 and as per the law
laid down by this Hon'ble Court in the judgment
dt.09.09.2021 in W.P.(C) No.19951/2020 as upheld by
the Division Bench of his Hon'ble Court vide judgment
// 2 //
dt.12.04.2023 in W.A. No,777/2021; and pass such
other order(s) as deemed fit and proper in the bonafide
interest of justice fair play,"
4. It is submitted by Mr. B.S. Tripathy-1, learned counsel for the
petitioner that after creation of 600 posts of DEO-cum-Assistants
sanctioned by Opposite Party No.1, the petitioner appointed as DEO-
cum-Assistant in Kotpad Tahasil in the district of Koraput initially
for a period of six months vide appointment order dated 20.08.2007
and thereafter, he is continuing in the said post uninterruptedly till
date.
5. Mr. Tripathy, learned counsel for the petitioner further
referring to the resolution of the G.A. Department dated 17.09.2013
submitted that the petitioner has completed six years of service
uninterruptedly on being appointed as a contractual Group-C and
Group-D posts are regularizing such posts. He also referred to the
judgment of this Court in the case of Patitapaban Dutta Dash and
others vrs. State of Odisha and others in W.P.(C) No.19951 of 2020
disposed of on 09.09.2021 and further submitted that the coordinate
Bench of this Court after examining the entire issue was pleased to
direct the Opposite Parties to issue formal regularization orders in
favour of similarly situated DEOs, who are working contractual basis
and have completed six years of service. Further, the order passed by
the coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No.1995 of 2020 was
upheld before the Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No.777 of
2021 and batch of other cases. The Division Bench of this Court vide
order dated 12.04.2023 has confirmed the order dated 09.09.2021 by
the learned Single Judge in the above noted writ application. Further
referring to the judgment dated 12.04.2023 passed by the Division
Bench of this Court, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
// 3 //
a direction has been given to comply with the direction given by the
learned Single Judge within a period twelve weeks from the date of
communication of the said order.
6. In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner stands on similar footing with the
petitioners in the case of Patitapaban Dutta Dash and others vrs.
State of Odisha and others and a batch of other matters. The
judgment delivered in the said case squarely applies to the facts of
the present case.
7. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, submits that
he does not dispute the proposition of law and the fact that the
judgment of the learned Single Judge in the case of Patitapaban
Dutta Dash and others vrs. State of Odisha and others and a batch
of other matters confirmed by the Division Bench in W.A. No.777 of
2021 and batch of other cases dated 12.04.2023. However, he further
submitted that the Opposite Parties-authorities have to verify the
stand of the petitioner on similar footing in the aforesaid case.
Accordingly, he further submitted that he has no objection this Court
before to consider the case of the petitioner and in the event the
petitioner stands on similar in the case of Patitapaban Dutta Dash
and others(supra) similar benefits may be extended to the petitioner
as well.
8. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the
respective parties, upon careful examination of the materials placed
before this Court as well as judgment in the case Patitapaban Dutta
Dash and others vrs. State of Odisha and others and a batch of
other matters by both the learned Single Judge and the Division
Bench of this Court, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ
// 4 //
petition at the stage of admission by directing the Opposite Parties to
examine the case of the petitioner and in the event they come to a
conclusion that the petitioner is covered by the judgment in the case
of Patitapaban Dutta Dash and others(supra) and similar benefits
has been given to the aforesaid referred cases within a period of
twelve weeks from the date of communication of the certified copy
this order.
9. With the aforesaid observation/direction, the writ petition is
disposed of.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper
application.
( A.K. Mohapatra )
Judge
Jagabandhu
Digitally signed by
JAGABAND JAGABANDHU
BEHERA
HU BEHERA Date: 2023.05.03
19:51:48 +05'30'
