[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Orissa High Court
Susil Kumar Baral vs State Of Odisha &Ors. ..... Opposite ... on 26 February, 2026
Author: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
Bench: Biraja Prasanna Satapathy
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
WP(C) Nos.23033, 23063 & 23136 of 2023
WP(C) No.23033 of 2023
Susil Kumar Baral ..... Petitioner
Mr. A. Kanungo, Advocate
Mr. D.K. Mohapatra, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha &Ors. ..... Opposite Parties
Mr. P.K. Panda, ASC
Mr. D.P. Nanda, Sr. Advocate
along with
Mr. R.K. Kanungo, Advocate
(Opp. Party No. 5)
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY
ORDER
26.02.2026
Order No.18
1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Since the issue involved in all the writ petitions is identical, with
the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the Parties, all the
matters were heard analogously and disposed of by the present
common order.
3. All these writ petitions have been filed challenging the
communication issued on 28.06.2023 by Opp. Party No. 5 to the
concerned agency-Opp. Party No. 6 with a direction to disengage
the present Petitioners from their engagement.
4. It is the case of the Petitioners that Petitioners are continuing as
Junior Engineer (Contractual) through outsourcing agency since last
so many years, initially under CESU and thereafter, under
SOUTHCo. It is contended that when the present Opp. Party No. 5
came into picture in the year 2020, the present Petitioners were also
allowed to continue through outsourcing agency as Junior Engineer
(Contractual).
4.1. It is however contended that on the face of such long
continuance though the agency, now because of the impugned letter
issued by Opp. Party No. 5 to disengage the Petitioners, they are
aggrieved by such action of Opp. Party No. 5. It is further
contended that since the work is perennial in nature, there is no
necessity to issue such a communication requesting the concerned
agency to disengage the present Petitioners who are continuing
through outsourcing agency since long. It is accordingly contended
that such communication issued by Opp. Party No. 5 on 28.06.2023
directing the agency to disengage the Petitioners, requires
interference of this Court. It is further contended that by virtue of
the interim order passed by this Court on 31.07.2023, Petitioners
are continuing through the agency as on date.
5. Mr. D.P. Nanda, learned Sr. Counsel appearing for Opp. Party
No. 5 along with Mr. R.K. Kanungo, learned counsel on the other
hand contended that there is no dispute that the present Petitioners
are continuing as Junior Engineer (Contractual) through
outsourcing, starting from the time CESU was in operation in the
State of Odisha. But TATA Power when came into picture in the
year 2020, since it is felt that continuance of the present Petitioners
is no more a requirement, the impugned communication was issued
directing for disengagement of the Petitioners who are continuing
admittedly through outsourcing agency-Opp. Party No. 6. It is
accordingly contended that since there is no requirement of the
present Petitioners for their continuance any further, such an action
was taken by Opp. Party No. 5.
5.1. However, because of the interim order passed by this Court,
Opp. Party No. 5 has no other option than to allow the Petitioners to
continue.
5.2. It is however fairly contended that even if the present
Petitioners are disengaged basing on the impugned communication
issued by Opp. Party No. 5, but in their place no fresh engagement
will be made through any outsourcing agency. It is further
contended that as and when Opp. Party No. 5 will feel it necessary
to execute the work performed by the Petitioners, Petitioners will be
given preference and they will be re-engaged through outsourcing.
It is also fairly contended that if any selection process is undertaken
by Opp. Party No. 5 to fill up the post in question on regular basis
even, these Petitioners will be given due weightage taking into
account their experience and seniority and all of them will be
provided with age relaxation in order to enable them to participate
in the process of selection.
6. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and
considering the submission made, this Court while disposing all the
three (3) writ petitions without interfering with the impugned
communication dt.28.06.2023, observe that in place of the present
Petitioners, no such fresh engagement will be made by Opp. Party
No. 5. It is further observed that as and when there will be any
requirement, with regard to the nature of work discharged by the
Petitioners, Petitioners will be given preference. It is further
observed that if any selection process is initiated to fill up the post
in question on regular basis, Petitioners will be given due weightage
and their past experience will be taken into consideration,
Petitioners will also be extended with age relaxation, for their
participating in the selection process. It is also observed that if there
is requirement at present for continuance of the Petitioners, Opp.
Party No. 5 shall allow the Petitioners to continue on the face of the
impugned communication through Opp. Party No. 6 or any other
agency.
7. All the three (3) writ petitions accordingly stand disposed of with
the aforesaid observation and direction. Interim order passed earlier
stands vacated in all the matters.
Photo copy of the order be placed in the connected case records.
(BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY)
Judge
Sneha
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
