Orissa High Court
Santosh Kumar Samantaray & vs State Of Odisha & Others on 11 May, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.14983 of 2023
Santosh Kumar Samantaray & .... Petitioners
others
Mr. S. Routray, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha & others .... Opposite Parties
Mr. S. N. Das, Advocate-for the OTDC
CORAM:
JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA
ORDER
Order No. 11.05.2023
01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual
/Physical Mode).
2. Heard Mr. S. Routray, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner as well as Mr. S. N. Das, learned Counsel for the OTDC.
Perused the writ petition as well as the documents annexed thereto.
3. The present writ application has been filed by the Petitioners
with the following prayer:-
"It is therefore, most humbly prayed that this
Hon'ble Court be graciously pleased to:
i) Admit the writ application.
ii) Call for the record.
iii) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other
writ/writs direction/directions directing the Opposite
Parties to regularize the service of the Petitioners from
the date of their initial appointment and further extend
all the consequential service and financial as due and
admissible to the Petitioners within a stipulated time to
be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.
iv) And/or pass such other order/ orders, direction/
directions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and
proper for the ends of justice."
4. It is submitted by Mr. Routray, learned counsel appearing for the
// 2 //
Petitioner that pursuant to an advertisement by the Odisha Tourism
Development Corporation Limited, the Petitioners applied for
appointment on contractual basis to different posts as advertised under
Annexure-1 to the writ application. Thereafter, the Petitioners were
issued with the appointment letter in the year, 2013. Accordingly, the
Petitioners joined in service, while the Petitioners were discharging
their duties pursuant to a decision vide letter dated 19.03.2018 twenty
contractual employees including the Petitioner were adjusted against the
vacant post and were allowed the grade pay as per G.A. Department
resolution dated 22.09.2017. It is further contended by learned counsel
for the Petitioner that since the appointment is on contractual basis the
service of the Petitioner is being renewed from time to time the last of
renewal was on 31.10.2022.
5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further drawing attention of
this Court to letter dated 04.05.2018 under Annexure-4 submitted
before this Court that pursuant to the decision taken in the 104th Board
meeting of the Corporation held on 19.03.2018. 20 contractual
employees including the Petitioner have been granted revised
remuneration with effect from 01.01.2018. He further submitted that
such remuneration is being enhanced from time to time as per the
schedule provided in the G.A. Department resolution dated 12.09.2017
under Annexure-7 to the writ application. It is further submitted by
learned counsel for the Petitioners that the Petitioners have been treated
under the Odisha Group-B Posts (Contractual Appointment) Rules,
2012 as amended vide notification dated 12.09.2017.
6. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at this juncture submitted that
although the Petitioners have been treated as Group-B employees under
the Rules 2013 and they have been given benefit of the pay scale as per
amendment vide resolution under Annexure-7 in the year, 2017.
However, their cases for regularization have not been considered by the
// 3 //
Opposite Parties. Further, drawing comparison with Group-C & B
employees, learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that after
completion of 6 years of service their services have been regularized.
Therefore, the present petitioners are concerned, the authorities have
ignored the cases of the Petitioners of regularization of their service.
Accordingly, the Petitioners have approached this court by filing the
present writ application.
7. Learned counsel for the Opposite Parties, on the other hand
submitted that the petitioners are initially engaged as contractual
employees and their contract is being renewed from time to time. It is
also contended by learned counsel for the Opposite Parties that the
petitioner have been given the benefits as is due and admissible to claim
as per the 2013 Rules with the amendment vide resolution under
Annexure-7 to the writ application. It is further contended by learned
counsel for the Opposite Parties that the Petitioners have been paid the
enhancement remuneration as provided under the rules with regard to
the regularization of service of the Petitioner. It is contended by learned
counsel for the Opposite Parties that the same has not been taken up yet
by the direction of the Opposite Parties-Corporation. It was also
submitted before this Court that in the event, the Petitioners approached
the authorities their cases for regularization of service shall be
considered by the Board of the Opposite Parties-Corporation in
accordance with law within a stipulated period of time.
8. With regard to regularization of service learned counsel for the
petitioner relied upon a decision of this Court in Rudrakanta Panda
and Ors. Vs. State of Odisha and Ors. decided on 19.01.2022, Bhaskar
Chandra Roul Vs. State of Odisha and Ors. decided on 17.02.2023 and
Manoranjan Swain and Ors. Vs. State of Odisha and Ors. decided on
24.02.2023. He further submitted that all the aforesaid judgments have
been rendered while interpreting the 2013 rules and accordingly,
// 4 //
Opposite Parties in those were directed to regularize the contractual
service of the Petitioner on completion of 6 years of service from the
date of initial appointment and with a further direction to pay all
consequential service and financial benefits within a stipulated period of
time.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioners also contended that the above
referred judgments identical to the facts of the present case. Therefore,
the authorities need to be considered the case of the Petitioners for
regularization of their services keeping in the view the aforesaid
judgments. He also contended that the case of the Petitioners be also
considered in the light of the order passed in Shibaji Sethy and others
Vs. State of Odisha and others in W.P.(C) No.9526 of 2022 decided on
09.05.2022 wherein this Court has directed the Opposite Parties to
consider the case of regularization of Petitioners, whose while working
as Casual Labourers on NMR Basis for a long time taking into
consideration the observation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case
of State of Karnataka Vs. Umadevi, reported in 2006(4) SCC 1 keeping
in view observation in para-53 of the aforesaid judgment as well as in
State of Karnataka and others Vs. M.L. Keshari and others, reported
in 2010(II) OLR (SC) 982 and in the case of Amarkanti Rai Vs. State
of Bihar and others, reported in (2015) 8 SCC 265.
10. Considering the submissions made by learned counsels
appearing for the respective parties and on a careful examination of
the background facts of the present case as well as materials placed
before this court for consideration, this Court is of the considered
view that the Petitioner should have approached the Departmental
Authority before approaching this Court by submitting his grievance
before the authorities first. In such view of the matter, this Court
deems it proper to dispose of the writ application at the stage of
admission by directing the Petitioner to file a comprehensive
// 5 //
representation along with all supporting documents as well as copies
of the judgments is relying in support of his contention before the
Managing Director, Odisha Tourism Development Corporation Ltd.-
Opposite Party No.2 within a period of three weeks from today. In
the event, such a representation is filed before the Opposite Party
No.2, the Opposite Party No.2 shall do well to consider the same in
the light of the judgments referred to hereinabove and dispose of the
representation by passing a speaking and reasoned order within two
months from the date of filing such representation. The decision so
taken be communicated to the Petitioner within two weeks thereafter.
11. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the writ
application stands disposed of.
Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.
( A.K. Mohapatra )
Judge
Anil
Digitally signed by
ANIL KUMAR ANIL KUMAR SAHOO
SAHOO Date: 2023.05.13
12:31:24 +05'30'
