Orissa High Court
Basanti Sahoo vs State Of Odisha & Ors on 8 November, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.36055 of 2023
Basanti Sahoo .... Petitioner
Mr. G.R.Sethi, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha & Ors. .... Opposite Parties
Mr. T.Patnaik,A.S.C.
CORAM:
JUSTICE A.K. MOHAPATRA
ORDER
Order No. 08.11.2023
01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual
/Physical Mode).
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as the learned
Additional Standing Counsel for the State. Perused the Writ Petition as
well as the documents annexed thereto.
3. The present Writ Petition has been filed with the following
prayer :
"It is therefore humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court
may graciously be pleased to admit the case, call for the
records and after hearing both the parties pass the following
reliefs;
i) To direct the direct the Opp.Parties to regularize the
service of the petitioner as Attendant-cum-Helper as
per the ratio decided in the case Secretary, State of
karnataka versus Umadevi (AIR 2006 SC 1806) and
State of Karnataka Vrs. M.L.Keshari (2010) 9 SCC 243.
ii) To direct the Opposite Parties to grant all financial and
consequential benefits flowing from the date when
juniors have been regularized.
And pass such other order/orders as may be
deemed fit and proper for the interest of justice."
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the
petitioner who was initially appointed on daily wage basis against a
// 2 //
Class-IV post w.e.f. 25.02.2000 had been working continuously for
almost 23 years. He further contended that despite working for
continuously 23 years, the service of the petitioner has not been
regularized in the meantime. Drawing attention of this Court to
Annexures-4 & 5, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
several recommendations have been made by the authorities for
regularization the service of the petitioner, however, the services of the
petitioner have not been regularized while the regularizing the service
of juniors. Being aggrieved by such arbitrary and discriminatory
conduct of the Opposite Parties, the Petitioner has approached this court
by filing writ application for a direction to the Opposite Parties to
regularize the service of the petitioner.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner in course of his argument also
referred to the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Secretary, State of Karnataka -v.- Uma Devi, reported in (2006) 4
SCC 1 and Amarkant Rai v. State of Bihar, reported in (2005) 8
SCC 265 and State of Karnataka vs. ML Keshari [AIR 2010 SC
2587] submitted before this Court that in view of the law laid down by
the Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as this Court by this Court in in
case of Basanta Kumar Barik -v.- State of Odisha and others
(WPC(OA) No.616 of 2017 decided on 26.11.2021). The service of
the petitioner are to be regularized keeping in view the uninterrupted of
service he has provided over the years.
6. Learned Addl. Standing counsel on the other hand contended that
the case of the petitioner is still under consideration. He further
contended that noting on record is revealed that the prayer of the
petitioner for regularization of service be rejected by the authorities. In
such view of the matter, learned Addl. Standing Counsel submitted
before this Court that he will have no objection in the event this Court
directs the Opposite Party No.2 to consider the case of the petitioner
keeping in view that fact that juniors have been regularized in the
// 3 //
meantime and pass necessary orders strictly in accordance with law and
in the light of ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
above noted judgments within a stipulated period of time.
7. Considering the submissions made by learned counsels appearing
for the parties and on a careful examination of the background facts of
the present case as well as taking into consideration the law applicable
to the facts of the present case as has been referred to hereinabove, this
Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ application at the stage of
admission by directing the Opposite Party No.2 to consider the
representation of the petitioner under Annexure-5 to the writ application
strictly in accordance with law within a period of two months from the
date of communication of a certified copy of this order. The
representation the petitioner under Annexure-5 shall be considered and
disposed of by passing a speaking and reasoned order. The decision so
taken be communicated to the Petitioner within two weeks thereafter.
8. 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
Rubi
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: RUBI BEHERA
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa
Date: 10-Nov-2023 15:37:26
