Arjun Mohan Prusti vs Ouat
2023 Latest Caselaw 13441 Ori

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                             W.P.(C) No.16840 of 2017

        Arjun Mohan Prusti                        ....               Petitioner
                                                           Mr. H.M. Dhal, Sr. Advocate

                                                   -versus-

        OUAT, BBSR & Anr.                         ....                Opposite Parties
                                                                Mr. S.C. Rath, Advocate

                              CORAM:
                 JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

                                          ORDER

31.10.2023 Order No

05. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical) Mode.

2. Heard Mr. H.M. Dhal, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. S.C. Rath, learned counsel appearing for the Opp. Party-University.

3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ petition inter alia with the following prayer:-

"Under the circumstances, the petitioner most humbly prays that this Hon;ble Court be graciously pleased to issue a Rule NISI calling upon the oopposte parties to show cause as to why;

i) the opposite parties shall not be directed to regularize the services of the petitioner w.e.f.8.11.1992 with all consequential service benefits;

ii) the inaction of the opposite parties in not regularizing the services of the petitioner w.e.f.8.11.1992 shall not be declared as illegal, arbitrary and without any authority of law;

If the opposite parties fail to show cause or show insufficient Cause the Rule be made absolute.

// 2 //

And for this act of kindness the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray."

4. It is contended that the claim as made in the writ petition is squarely covered by a Judgment of this Court so passed on 15.12.2015 in W.P.(C) No. 2185 of 2009, which has been confirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP(C) Diary No. 16340 of 2020 and subsequent order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 5216 of 2019 disposed of on 27.03.2019 as well as the order dtd.17.05.2019 in W.P.(C) No. 9087 of 2019. It is also contended that the subsequent order passed by this Court in the aforesaid two writ petitions have been confirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court while dismissing the SLP so filed by the University.

5. Mr. Rath, learned counsel for the University while does not dispute the orders passed by this Court so confirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court, contended that the Petitioner may be permitted to move the authority seeking regularization of the period in question as prayed for in the writ petition.

6. Considering the submissions made, while disposing the writ petition this Court permits the Petitioner to move an appropriate application to get the benefit as prayed for in the present writ petition before Opp. Party No. 1 within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of this order. It is observed that, if any such application is moved within the aforesaid time period, Opp. Party No. 1 shall take a lawful decision on the same within a further period of six (6) weeks. However, it is observed that while taking such a decision on the Petitioner's claim, the relevancy and effects of the Judgment and orders passed by this Court, so confirmed by

// 3 //

the Hon'ble Apex Court as cited supra be taken into consideration, if it is applicable to the case of the Petitioner.

7. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observation and direction.

(Biraja Prasanna Satapathy) Judge Sneha

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SNEHANJALI PARIDA Designation: Sr. Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 01-Nov-2023 18:46:02