Orissa High Court
Sarat Naik vs State Of Orissa & Ors. ..... Opposite ... on 27 January, 2025
Author: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
Bench: Aditya Kumar Mohapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) No.2379 of 2025
Sarat Naik ..... Petitioner
Represented By Adv. -
Basudev Barik
-versus-
State Of Orissa & ors. ..... Opposite Parties
Represented By Adv. -
M.R.Patra, A.S.C.
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR
MOHAPATRA
ORDER
27.01.2025
Order No.
01. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual
/Physical Mode).
2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as learned
Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the State-Opposite
Parties.
3. The Petitioner, who is working in the work charge
establishment, has filed this writ petition to be brought over to
regular establishment after completion of five years of service and he
should be appointed in regular post and granted all benefits as due
and admissible to him in accordance with law, including
pension/pensionary benefits taking into account his entire period of
service.
4. Mr. B. Barik, learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that
the Petitioner has already been served more than forty years in the
work charged establishment, but he has not yet been brought over to
the regular establishment though stand at par with his counterparts
who had filed O.A. No. 2559(C) of 1999 (Kasidev Maharana v. State
of Orissa & Ors.) and batch disposed of vide order dated 16.11.1999,
which has been confirmed by this Court vide order dated 08.01.2018
passed in WP(C) No. 7246 of 2016 and re-affirmed by the apex
Court vide order dated 30.07.2018 passed in Diary No.23207 of
2018, and that the said order of the tribunal has been implemented
pursuant to the common judgment dated 27.07.2021 passed by this
Court in CONTC (CPC) No. 305 of 2000 and batch. It is also further
contended that in the above eventuality, let the Petitioner files an
application before the authority concerned seeking relief which has
already been granted to similarly situated persons, so that the
authority can consider the same in the light of the order passed by the
tribunal, as mentioned above.
5. Mr. S. Jena, learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing
for the State-Opposite Parties contended that if the Petitioner is
working in the work charge establishment and he wants to be brought
over to the regular establishment and such question has already been
considered by the tribunal in the cases, referred to above, then his
grievance can be considered by the authority concerned in the light of
the order passed by the tribunal.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going
through the records, this Court is of the considered view that since
the Petitioner is working in the work charge establishment and he
wants to come over to regular establishment, his case requires
consideration in the light of the orders dated 16.11.1999 passed by
the tribunal in O.A. No. 2559(C) of 1999 (Kasidev Maharana vs.
State of Orissa & ors.) and batch, which has been confirmed by this
Court vide order dated 08.01.2018 passed in WP(C) No. 7246 of
2016 and re-affirmed by the apex Court vide order dated 30.07.2018
passed in Diary No.23207 of 2018, in view of implementation of the
order of the tribunal pursuant to the common judgment dated
27.07.2021 passed by this Court in CONTC (CPC) No. 305 of 2000
and batch. Consequentially, this Court directs that if the Petitioner
files an application/representation before the authority concerned
within two weeks hence, the same shall be considered in the light of
the order passed by the tribunal, referred to above, as expeditiously
as possible preferably within a period of three months from the date
of receipt of the application/representation.
7. With the above observation and direction, the writ petition
stands disposed of.
Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.
( A.K. Mohapatra)
Judge
Anil
Location: High Court of Orissa
